Elizabeth Warren is running for the Senate

[jayjay]

Originally Posted by Debaser

I'm a white guy. I'm in one of the groups that's discriminated against in our current system

Well, there's all the tell I need to know what to think about your argument...

[Really Not All That Bright]

In terms of admission to Harvard University, he is correct. Whether or not that discrimination is justified is another question.

[Debaser]

Originally Posted by elucidator

The article cited above clearly states that she was "recruited" by Harvard. "Recruited" is a term generally meaning that the school recruiting very much wants the subject to come teach for them. It further implies that interviews for her position will likely be cordial and friendly. Because they are recruiting her. That's what that means.

That's all you've got? The definition of a word from the article that I linked to?

I've been "recruited" before. Recruiters call me all the time from companies who might want to hire me. That doesn't mean that it won't be competitive once I start the interview process.

Of course, this might not at all be similar to how it works at Harvard. Which I why I was hoping you might actually add some content to the board by introducing some facts to this thread.

I should have known not to expect so much from you.

[John Mace]

All I want to know is if she's elected, and votes to eliminate the Bush tax cuts, can we call her an Indian giver?

[elucidator]

I see. So, according to you, then, the term "recruited" simply means "Hey, if you would like to submit an application, nobody here will stop you. Seriously, its OK with us."?

I provide citation, you provide your opinion. If offer a cite that says, from people in a position to know, that Ms Warren's ancestry was not even mentioned. In rebuttal, you provide your opinion. i provide a citation that Harvard actively pursued Ms Warren for their faculty, and you provide your opinion, bolstered by a personal anecdote. With all due awe, your personal history is not data.

[elucidator]

Originally Posted by John Mace

All I want to know is if she's elected, and votes to eliminate the Bush tax cuts, can we call her an Indian giver?

That would be in marginally better taste than offering her a gift of blankets.

[Debaser]

Originally Posted by John Mace

All I want to know is if she's elected, and votes to eliminate the Bush tax cuts, can we call her an Indian giver?

Either way, I call her Fauxcahontas.

Somebody mentioned Howie Carr. His new column is out. It seems that Fauxcahontas has a history of helping her family prosper by flipping foreclosed properties.

It is if Granny Warren’s picking up some good stuff cheap, a la Bain Capital. Let’s move on to another foreclosure, this one on 500 NW 18th St. in her hometown. She’s listed as the mortgagee on a $55,000 mortgage taken out by her brother John in 1992.

In 1998, John Herring sold the foreclosed house for $140,000.

The hits just keep on coming.

[Debaser]

Originally Posted by elucidator

I see. So, according to you, then, the term "recruited" simply means "Hey, if you would like to submit an application, nobody here will stop you. Seriously, its OK with us."?

I'm saying that's how it works in many industries. I have said I don't know how it works at Harvard. I'd genuinely like to know, which is why I asked you for a cite.

i provide a citation that Harvard actively pursued Ms Warren for their faculty, and you provide your opinion, bolstered by a personal anecdote. With all due awe, your personal history is not data.

Your cite touches on this very briefly, saying that they "courted her" and "pursued her", but it's only mentioned in passing and with no detail or explanation. There is no reference to why they were interested in her or what they liked about her other than her minority status, if there is anything.

You read into this that she was a "shoo-in" and that "it wasn't like there was any likelihood she needed to bolster her CV to get the job". I asked for a cite for this, and you've refused to provide one.

[elucidator]

I have testimony from people who were actually there, Debaser! They said, in no uncertain terms, that her ancestry had no bearing on their decision. I'm assuming that they know something about Harvard's hiring procedures. Which, as you admit, you don't.

[Nicest of the Damned]

Originally Posted by Debaser

It seems that Fauxcahontas has a history of helping her family prosper by flipping foreclosed properties.

It mentions two houses. One house was owned for about six years. The other more than 10 years. I think that kind of stretches the definition of flipping. Were her family members living in the houses during that time? Did they rent them out?

[Debaser]

Originally Posted by elucidator

I have testimony from people who were actually there, Debaser! They said, in no uncertain terms, that her ancestry had no bearing on their decision. I'm assuming that they know something about Harvard's hiring procedures. Which, as you admit, you don't.

But you don't have anything to cite that she was a "shoo-in" and that "it wasn't like there was any likelihood she needed to bolster her CV to get the job". You just made that part up.

You should just retract it. Take your licks.

[Jack Batty]

I don't know a lot about "flipping houses" but there was a goddamned television show dedicated to the practice, so that leads me to believe it's probably not a felony. So what's the piont to that accusation in the first place? What, only Republicans are allowed to make money on real estate?

[jayjay]

Running scared, Pubbies...running scared. What WILL we ever do with another senator who doesn't consider herself beholden to the vultures?

[Debaser]

Originally Posted by Nicest of the Damned

It mentions two houses. One house was owned for about six years. The other more than 10 years. I think that kind of stretches the definition of flipping. Were her family members living in the houses during that time? Did they rent them out?

Yeah, "flipping" might be a bit strong. But one of her big claims to fame is her opposition to the evil foreclosures. The fact that she's bought foreclosures at all is not good for her. Especially with profit like that for her family members.

[Skammer]

First of all, those foreclosures were years ago and not related to the financial crisis. You'll have to show us where Warren came out as opposed to all foreclosures, even legitimate ones.

Secondly, as has already been pointed out, the homes were owned for years which kind of means they weren't "flipped." They sound like solid investments or, you know, homes.

Third, even if she bought legitmately foreclosed homes and flipped them a week later for a killing, what the hell is the matter with that? That's good market capitalism right there, you should be applauding her.

If you're trying to portray her as some kind of hypocrite because she's criticized the current foreclosure crisis yet purchased foreclosed properties years before the crisis occurred, you're kind of missing the point of her criticism. You're comparing apples and... spaghetti.

[jayjay]

Man, Debaser, that straw-Warren you're dragging around is starting to look pretty flat and beat-up...

[ElvisL1ves]

Originally Posted by Debaser

Either way, I call her Fauxcahontas.

We have now verified that you're among the elite few who does not yet realize that Howie Carr's act is comedy, not commentary.

When you're ready to discuss qualifications and policies, and all that other grown-up stuff you won't find in the Herald or on talk radio, do please let us know, will you? Thanks.

[elucidator]

Originally Posted by Debaser

Yeah, "flipping" might be a bit strong.....

Could be "a bit strong". Or even "rather misleading". Maybe not "bald faced lie". Maybe not.

[Finagle]

Originally Posted by Debaser

Yeah, "flipping" might be a bit strong. But one of her big claims to fame is her opposition to the evil foreclosures. The fact that she's bought foreclosures at all is not good for her. Especially with profit like that for her family members.

"Oh, look, Warren participated in a couple of completely normal real estate transactions twenty years ago. What a hypocrite!"

You know, if I had helped my brother to buy a house, most people would think I was a pretty nice guy. But apparently, if you're a liberal law professor, that makes you evil incarnate.

As for profit -- unless you have a detailed list of what renovations they did to each house, you have no ability (or right) to claim that a profit was made. A house that was bought at auction for $4,000 after a foreclosure? They're lucky it had plumbing (and I don't know that it did.) Sold it for $30K? I put $30K into renovations on my house in the first couple years I owned it and believe me, I paid much, much more than $4K for it.

The fact that the people who used to own the house had a kid in the first Iraq War is an obvious appeal to the Fox News demographic, but I don't think most people believe that the bank would have handed them back their house if Warren hadn't shown up and bought it at auction. So that's pretty irrelevant.

I suppose there are those that are slack-jawed credulous enough believe that this somehow reflects badly on Warren, but based on the facts in the article, I'm not seeing it.

[John Mace]

Originally Posted by Debaser

Yeah, "flipping" might be a bit strong. But one of her big claims to fame is her opposition to the evil foreclosures. The fact that she's bought foreclosures at all is not good for her. Especially with profit like that for her family members.

Can we get some quotes to flesh out her views on "evil foreclosures"?

Originally Posted by elucidator

That would be in marginally better taste than offering her a gift of blankets.

I was thinking about seeing if she'd sell me Nantucket for $24 worth of beads. (The Vineyard is for tourists.)

[elucidator]

You're gonna match wits with that woman? You taking bets?

[John Mace]

"That woman"? Does that bring back memories...

[Terr]

Every time Warren "explains" things, she is caught in more and more lies.

She claims that he parents had to elope because her mother was 1/16th Cherokiee. A couple of hours later Breitbart.com posts the documentation that shows that the parents were married in a religious ceremony in their hometown.

Then of course Breitbart finds a video where Warren is blatantly lying about her grandmother's history.

She just keeps digging the hole deeper and deeper.

[John Mace]

Slightly embellished family history. My outrage meter is on about a 1 here. I'd put this on par with Rubio's story about how his parents came to the US from Cuba. Not sure why she needed to be so specific with dates, though, if they actually were wrong. But I'd prefer a cite less biased than Brietbart as verification.

[Lobohan]

Originally Posted by Terr

Every time Warren "explains" things, she is caught in more and more lies.

She claims that he parents had to elope because her mother was 1/16th Cherokiee. A couple of hours later Breitbart.com posts the documentation that shows that the parents were married in a religious ceremony in their hometown.

Then of course Breitbart finds a video where Warren is blatantly lying about her grandmother's history.

She just keeps digging the hole deeper and deeper.

This is what it looks like when the outrage generator is left on too long.

She didn't blatantly lie. She said her grandmother lived to see her graduate from college. She actually died several months earlier. But I assume it was a done deal by then.

Do you think that grammie had any reason to assume that Warren would quit college or suddenly flunk out in her senior year?

Protip: Brietbart is a news site that exists to point at normal things and scream about how they are outrageous. You're being lied to and manipulated by people who think you're stupid.

[Lobohan]

Originally Posted by John Mace

Slightly embellished family history. My outrage meter is on about a 1 here. I'd put this on par with Rubio's story about how his parents came to the US from Cuba. Not sure why she needed to be so specific with dates, though, if they actually were wrong. But I'd prefer a cite less biased than Brietbart as verification.

Well, Rubio's story is wrong in a way that undercuts the narrative. He wasn't fleeing Castro.

Warren's grandma lived to see her trying on gowns in the run-up to graduation. It's not even deceitful to say that she saw her grandchild graduating college. She saw her in college for however many years and knew that graduation was imminent.

I'd put this at outrage zero. Honestly, if this were a Republican politico, I'd think this was insane to even mention.

[John Mace]

Originally Posted by Lobohan

Well, Rubio's story is wrong in a way that undercuts the narrative. He wasn't fleeing Castro.

Warren's grandma lived to see her trying on gowns in the run-up to graduation. It's not even deceitful to say that she saw her grandchild graduating college. She saw her in college for however many years and knew that graduation was imminent.

I'd put this at outrage zero. Honestly, if this were a Republican politico, I'd think this was insane to even mention.

I would say that his parents could see the revolution coming in the same way Warren's grandmother could see he graduation coming. The only real outrage wrt Warren's story, assuming the analysis is correct, is that she couldn't be arsed to check her dates. Why give them if they are clearly wrong? Did she not remember when her beloved grandmother died?

[Lobohan]

Originally Posted by John Mace

I would say that his parents could see the revolution coming in the same way Warren's grandmother could see he graduation coming. The only real outrage wrt Warren's story, assuming the analysis is correct, is that she couldn't be arsed to check her dates. Why give them if they are clearly wrong? Did she not remember when her beloved grandmother died?

I don't know enough of the Cuban revolution to know if it was sketchy three years before the actual revolution, so I can't say on that part of it. They might have just been looking for a good place to do business and fleeing nothing for all I know.

But as for the dates, I could see grouping events from thirty years earlier not being sinister. And as I said, it's not like her grand mother never knew she was graduating college. She just didn't make it to the ceremony.

[John Mace]

I didn't say it was sinister. I'd call it sloppy, or if intentional, cynical.

Still, it's a rare politician who isn't caught having embellished his family history at one time or another. Her transgression, if it even is one, doesn't seem out of line with what we see all the time.

[Damuri Ajashi]

Originally Posted by Debaser

Yeah, "flipping" might be a bit strong. But one of her big claims to fame is her opposition to the evil foreclosures. The fact that she's bought foreclosures at all is not good for her. Especially with profit like that for her family members.

Pfft. Yeah because there is nothing different about the foreclosures she was speaking out against.

[Really Not All That Bright]

Originally Posted by John Mace

Still, it's a rare politician who isn't caught having embellished his family history at one time or another. Her transgression, if it even is one, doesn't seem out of line with what we see all the time.

Sure, and somebody generally starts threads about those other embellishments too: GWB's military service, Rubio's "refugee" parents, Biden's sort-of-plagiarism, and so on.

[John Mace]

Originally Posted by Really Not All That Bright

Sure, and somebody generally starts threads about those other embellishments too: GWB's military service, Rubio's "refugee" parents, Biden's sort-of-plagiarism, and so on.

So what?

[Really Not All That Bright]

You seem to be arguing that Warren's error/lie/whatever doesn't warrant a thread.

[John Mace]

Originally Posted by Really Not All That Bright

You seem to be arguing that Warren's error/lie/whatever doesn't warrant a thread.

Well, first of all, this is a side topic in a thread that was started about EW. The OP doesn't mention this issue at all. So this isn't a thread about it.

Secondly, you're wrong. I find it an interestingly humorous story about a politician caught up in embellishment. Some people seem to be outraged about it. I'm not. Are you? And if you're not, are arguing that this topic doesn't warrant a thread?

[Really Not All That Bright]

I'm not outraged, but that might be because I don't live in Massachusetts and don't give a shit. If I did, I might have started a thread about it.

[waterj2]

Originally Posted by Qin Shi Huangdi

In addition, it appears Ms. Warren has a challenge from the left (apparently to some she is not leftist enough): http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/27/us...achusetts.html. Perhaps Marisa DeFranco can pull a Sharron Angle or a Christine O'Donnell... *Keeps fingers crossed*

According to the email I just received from the Warren campaign, she just got 95% of the vote at the state convention. She needed 85% to avert a primary challenge. So, no such luck for you.

Meanwhile, Warren's favorability throughout the Native American heritage non-scandal has remained flat (after declining in April from its peak), and her unfavoribility is actually dropping: http://polltracker.talkingpointsmemo...avorability-ma

[BrainGlutton]

nm

[gamerunknown]

Originally Posted by Really Not All That Bright

In terms of admission to Harvard University, he is correct.

He's wrong on the male part. Females are under represented in Harvard. Females form 50.6% of the US population and 48.4% of students there. Native Americans are likewise underrepresented, forming 0.4% of students and 0.9% of the US population. Blacks are underrepresented, forming 12.6% of the US population and 5.6% of students. Asians are overrepresented at 4.8% of the US population and 12.5% of the students. If he wanted to argue consideration for the world as a whole, blacks are still underrepresented at 20% of the world population.

Claiming blacks have an easier admission criteria regardless is merely taking the argument a step back to the substantial environmental benefits that white individuals enjoy and the environmental effects black people suffer. Claiming inherent racial differences is best saved for another thread.

[Really Not All That Bright]

That's not how it works. You have to look at the number of students in each group relative to the number of applicants, not the general population. If Harvard only had two female applicants, it would hardly be "discrimination" if it only had two female students.

I notice that you left out the part of the quoted post that makes the second paragraph of yours superfluous, by the way.

[magellan01]

I think people are being too hard on Warren. I mean, she's running in MA and she's doing thing the MA way. I mean, sheeze, the other senator turned a scratch on the arm into three Purple Hearts and being embraced as a war hero. Until he threw the medals away at the Washington Hall to be an anti-war hero. Until he decided to tell the American people he was "reporting for duty" as a surviving war hero. If she's turning some high cheekbones and being able to walk softly at night into being a Cherokee, meh. Small potatoes. By MA standards, any way. By normal standards she'd slink away in embarrassment, but like I said, it's MA!

[jayjay]

Originally Posted by magellan01

I think people are being too hard on Warren. I mean, she's running in MA and she's doing thing the MA way. I mean, sheeze, the other senator turned a scratch on the arm into three Purple Hearts and being embraced as a war hero. Until he threw the medals away at the Washington Hall to be an anti-war hero. Until he decided to tell the American people he was "reporting for duty" as a surviving war hero. If she's turning some high cheekbones and being able to walk softly at night into being a Cherokee, meh. Small potatoes. By MA standards, any way. By normal standards she'd slink away in embarrassment, but like I said, it's MA!

Really? Do you want a purple heart band-aid so you can belittle someone who actually served in wartime, in the war ZONE, as opposed to the son of privilege who got a stateside billet because of who his father was?

[Really Not All That Bright]

Originally Posted by magellan01

I think people are being too hard on Warren. I mean, she's running in MA and she's doing thing the MA way. I mean, sheeze, the other senator turned a scratch on the arm into three Purple Hearts and being embraced as a war hero. Until he threw the medals away at the Washington Hall to be an anti-war hero. Until he decided to tell the American people he was "reporting for duty" as a surviving war hero. If she's turning some high cheekbones and being able to walk softly at night into being a Cherokee, meh. Small potatoes. By MA standards, any way. By normal standards she'd slink away in embarrassment, but like I said, it's MA!

I'm no fan of Kerry, but this is a fucking idiotic post. You know he still has a two-inch piece of shrapnel lodged in his thigh, right?

[BrainGlutton]

Warren says Americans "understand the game is rigged."

[magellan01]

Originally Posted by Really Not All That Bright

I'm no fan of Kerry, but this is a fucking idiotic post. You know he still has a two-inch piece of shrapnel lodged in his thigh, right?

Not the result of enemy fire, thus it does not merit the award. This has all been discussed before. So, let's concentrate on the present attempt of a prospective MA senator to fabricate a history. I didm't intend to my observation to turn into a hijack.

Originally Posted by jayjay

Really? Do you want a purple heart band-aid so you can belittle someone who actually served in wartime, in the war ZONE, as opposed to the son of privilege who got a stateside billet because of who his father was?

What does Bush have to do with Kerry's service? Unless you think I'm a fan of Bush and/or voted for him. Which I am not. And did not.

[Robot Arm]

Originally Posted by magellan01

What does Bush have to do with Kerry's service?

About as much as Kerry's service has to do with Warren's campaign.

[magellan01]

Originally Posted by Robot Arm

About as much as Kerry's service has to do with Warren's campaign.

True. But the similarity of fabricating a persona struck me and I thought it interesting that they were both from MA. It's not really anything to make a big deal about. I mean it's not like she drove a car off a bridge with someone in the passenger seat and didn't immediately notify the police. THAT would be an even odder coincidence.

[EddyTeddyFreddy]

Originally Posted by magellan01

she's doing thing the MA way.

And for Pete's sake, it's such a terrible way! Why, just look at the divorce rate among the godless gay-marrying heathens there!

Oh, wait; it's the lowest in the nation, after D.C.


Um, well, but just look at the terrible joblessness among those damned job-destroying socialist liberals!

Oh, wait; it's got a 6.0 percent unemployment rate.

But, but, but... universal health coverage under the MA model will bankrupt everyone!

Oh, wait; health insurance cost increases have been declining sharply.

Hell, we've even got the fourth-lowest rate of obesity in the whole damned country.

Yeh, that "MA way" sure is a helluva flop, huh?

[EddyTeddyFreddy]

Originally Posted by magellan01

they were both from MA.

You do know that Warren was born and raised in Oklahoma, right?

[jayjay]

Originally Posted by EddyTeddyFreddy

Yeh, that "MA way" sure is a helluva flop, huh?

You know..."Taxachusetts!" Hurrhurr..amirite!?

[boytyperanma]

Originally Posted by EddyTeddyFreddy

You do know that Warren was born and raised in Oklahoma, right?

Look now, Magellan01 is trying his best to unfairly disparage Warren by connecting her to totally unrelated and in some cases made up fantasies of his, you can't go around destroying his narrative by pointing out facts.