Elizabeth Warren and the Tragedy of Modern Liberalism.

Discussion in 'Politics & Religion' started by Max E. Pad, May 3, 2012.

  1. So let me get this straight, Elizabeth Warren gets busted for putting herself down as a minority in order to exploit the school and advance her career, and now she is claiming Scott Brown is a sexist for pointing that out???

    Liberals have to be the most depraved human beings on the planet, im sure the next attack on Brown will be that he is a racist, who cant stand the thought of a dark skinned native american like Elizabeth Warren in the senate. Every time i think liberals have finally jumped the shark with this shit they somehow manage to take it a step further.

    As utterly obnoxious–and insulting to voters–as the White House’s “war on women” was, there were moments when I actually felt a pang of sympathy for the loyal foot soldiers dispatched to pillage the news cycle. Carrying the banner of this base anti-intellectualism required a certain shamelessness that was off-putting, but at times strangely pitiful. One such example came after Rush Limbaugh insulted the 30-year-old liberal activist Sandra Fluke, and in response Neera Tanden, once an adviser to both Clintons and to President Obama and now president of the Center for American Progress, was reduced to tweeting this:

    Outraged Rush is attacking all women thru Sandra Fluke? Pl sign CAP’s petition: http://cap.af/xNDJwc – I #standwithsandra & hope you will 2

    That the Obama White House has taken men and women of repute and transformed them into Axelrodian snark artists long preceded Tanden’s tweet. But it caught my attention because it seemed to be the reductio ad absurdum of modern liberalism. Until, that is, Elizabeth Warren bailed her out.

    Warren, the Democratic Senate candidate challenging Scott Brown in Massachusetts, was the subject of a rather bizarre controversy this week when it was revealed she claimed Native American heritage as her career in academia proceeded, only to drop the dubious claim once she reached the pinnacle of her academic career track: Harvard Law faculty. She has not handled the controversy well, to say the least. And the wreckage of her campaign’s attempts at spinning this make you want to look away.

    But don’t. Because Warren is playing an important role in our political discourse: she is the ghost of liberalism future. Warren’s alleged use of affirmative action, if true, would have to be the most egregious abuse of the system at the expense of minorities we’ve seen yet. Elizabeth Warren is, as a white woman, statistically speaking very much a member of this country’s majority. The only category in which she is a true minority is wealth: Elizabeth Warren is very, very rich.

    But Warren was not done making a mockery of a system she seems to have exploited, and in so doing risked discrediting. To call her on these shenanigans, she explained, is sexist. Hot Air has caught her repeating this claim, making it a pillar of her defense. First, her campaign spokeswoman said this: “Once again, the qualifications and ability of a woman are being called into question by Scott Brown who did the same thing with the Supreme Court nomination of Elena Kagan. It’s outrageous.”

    Then Warren waded into it herself, saying of Brown: “What does he think it takes for a woman to be qualified?”

    The sad part about all this is that Warren is clearly intelligent and dedicated to her (redistributionist) cause. Back in August, Christopher Caldwell wrote a piece on her in the Weekly Standard in which he praised her earlier writing as “brilliant and counterintuitive work.” Though many on the right object to Warren’s politics, no one thought she was ill-equipped intellectually for the important debate on economic policy now sweeping the public sphere.

    Yet in the age of Obama, this is how campaigns are run. Warren may have interesting things to say, but she, too, has become something of a liberal cliché. Despite her obvious smarts, she has reflexively fallen back on charges of sexism, even when they are so ridiculous as to make you cringe. If Warren, a rich, white, Harvard professor, is a victim, everyone is.

    Why does this matter? Because it reveals that the left thinks affirmative action is a joke, another cudgel with which to attack political opponents at the expense of minorities who might, thanks to liberalism’s insistence on keeping students in failed school districts, actually put the policy to some good use. And because if Elizabeth Warren is unable to advance coherent liberal policy arguments, then there may be none to advance.

  2. Lucrum


    That pretty well sums it up.
  3. I understand her point.

    she used the minority card till she didn't need it anymore, now she is playing the sexist card. She complains because brown is not treating her like an equal and somehow she couldn't advance on her own merits because she is a woman and somehow she couldn't succeed by being a woman so she used the native american card.

    Someone else said it here, that this country wasn't too bad till we started electing and appointing women.

    Oh I know, if a woman was in charge there wouldn't be any wars, yeah right, once a month there is a fucking war with a woman.
  4. pspr


    It's really going to get good when she plays the hispanic card!! :eek:
  5. Elizabeth Warren brings no peace to Dems

    Elizabeth Warren’s stumbling efforts to douse the firestorm surrounding her claims of being a Native American minority have raised concerns among local and national Democrats who are questioning her campaign’s competence.

    “There’s nobody watching this that doesn’t think she’s in big trouble,” one well-known Massachusetts Democrat said.

    Joe Trippi, a prominent national Democratic consultant, told the Herald that while Warren has time to recover, the campaign should have anticipated this issue would surface.

    “The problem is they weren’t ready for something they should have been ahead of,” Trippi said.

    Another nationally known Democratic consultant said while there is no hand-wringing yet in the party, “The fact they weren’t prepared for this is a little surprising.”

    Some national political experts had much stronger words for Warren’s conflicting explanations about why she listed herself as a minority in university directories.

    “This takes her biography into a bizarre dimension,” said Larry Sabato, director of the University of Virginia Center for Politics. “It has derailed the effort to define Warren in a voter-friendly way.”

    Sabato also said that Warren’s claim that she didn’t list herself as a minority to gain an employment advantage is not believable.

    “This is what happens when candidates don’t tell the truth,” he said. “It’s pretty obvious she was using (the minority listing) for career advancement.”

    One well-known Massachusetts Democratic strategist faulted Warren and her campaign for failing to put out a consistent message.

    The strategist also said many local Democrats are alarmed at the campaign’s failure to contain the damage after the Herald first reported about Warren’s minority status at Harvard in the 1990s, based on claims her great-great-great grandmother was Cherokee.

    After first saying she didn’t know anything about reports that Harvard Law had listed her as a minority, Warren’s campaign then said she was “proud” of her Native American heritage, citing records showing she was 1⁄32nd Cherokee.

    And in a rambling response on Wednesday, Warren went much further, saying her Native American ancestry was always a part of her life story, even though she had never talked about it publicly before.

    Warren then recounted how a relative had told her that her Native American heritage was why her grandfather had “high cheekbones like all of the Indians do” — a response that critics have pounced on as perpetuating Native American stereotypes.

    “That’s kind of racism,” Sabato said.

    National Democrats and the White House are counting on Warren to keep control of the U.S. Senate. Warren has raised millions, but her recent performance is showing her inexperience as a campaigner, some Democrats say.

    “It is not uncommon for first-time candidates who haven’t come under this spotlight to face these kinds of challenges,” the national Democratic consultant said. “It’s a campaign that is obviously going through some growing pains but this is one week in a long campaign.”