Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Elizabeth Warren: “I’m not backing off from my family” on Cherokee claim

Elizabeth Warren: “I’m not backing off from my family” on Cherokee claim

Elizabeth Warren is standing by her claim of Cherokee heritage even though there is no evidence to back up that claim, and plenty of evidence that it is not true.

On Morning Joe this morning she refused to back down even an inch.  She also mocked the Boston Herald, which has discovered many of the facts showing that Warren has not been truthful in her story.

Scarborough dumbed down and mischaracterized Warren’s Cherokee scandal as being about “applications to law schools.”

Here are some of Warren’s statements:

“I think that people, actually most people were never very interested in it.  We got the fact out there very early on it.   This is how I grew up Joe, this is my family, I’m not backing off from my family…. The Boston Herald is The Boston Herald, what can I say … It has its own point of view and it’s going to drive its own point of view…

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

“She also mocked the Boston Herald…”

Just HAD to punch that Tar Baby, dinya, Liz…???

(adviser face-palms all around)

It dominates only because she hijacked a race to advance her career. If she had checked off “White” she wouldn’t have gotten a job at Harvard. She is no better than those two race hustlers Rev. Jackson and Rev. Sharpton.

From the sublime…to the ridiculous…to the pathological. She is unhinged.

Apparently she come from a family of fabalists or in common english “liars” …

listingstarboard | June 14, 2012 at 12:29 pm

But the liberals will vote for her anyway.

This episode is a perfect example of why Warren is completely unsuited to be a US Senator. When presented with evidence that her claim was false, she fails to accept the new information, and instead she double-downs on her false claim. Why anyone would want such a person serving as their representative in Government is beyond me.

    deadrody in reply to dawgfan. | June 14, 2012 at 8:41 pm

    Exactly. The continued stonewalling and abject refusal to even address factual evidence that contradicts her claim of family history is going to be her undoing. Her family history is irrelevant. The stories her family told back in teh day don’t matter to anyone with half a brain. That is not the basis for determining someone is a “minority”, and I think a sizable majority of people even in Massachusetts see it that way. There are certainly a number of liberals that will see past that and vote for her anyway, but I think she is in big trouble if she keeps on with this string of denials.

    TrooperJohnSmith in reply to dawgfan. | June 14, 2012 at 11:29 pm

    This speaks the the question of ‘integrity,’ the lack of which is at the heart of the present situation in America.

    But, since she’s a Democrat… from Mass. Who cares about integrity, right?

Coming to the kindergarten classes and libraries of Boston this season: Elizabeth Warren – The Little “Engine” That Could.

“I think I am, I think I am, I think I am.”

A great lesson of optimism for all future generations.

    MXG in reply to MXG. | June 14, 2012 at 12:46 pm

    Its probably too late for my children, but I wonder what minority group my grandchildren will choose to be? My wife does have high cheek bones.

What a hole! Does the rule of holes even apply in dark Blue MA when a prog is shoveling?

    raven in reply to MaDr. | June 14, 2012 at 1:22 pm

    But it’s not a hole to her, or to the Left. It’s “virtue” to them. Which is why she’s becoming their heroine, their Joan of Arc. It’s the kind of blunt “true believer” pathology that they admire.

theduchessofkitty | June 14, 2012 at 1:10 pm

Pretty soon she’s soon going to say something like “This is MY TRUTH!”

She’s sounding more and more like Rigoberta Menchu every day.

(Google her. She pulled almost the same trick and even won a Nobel Peace Prize because of it… and then inconvenient facts began to surface… and then questions…)

It’s hard to shame someone who is a shameless liar.

I wouldn’t taker her word that someone had executed a document in her presence.

Why should we worry about her false claim of minority status when our net worth is DOWN 38% in the last three years!

I wonder if Obama thanked her for her ringing endorsement of his economic policies?

She’s gone full Costanza.

“Just remember… it’s not a lie if you believe it.”

“We got the fact out there very early on it…”

So Elizabeth Warren even tells lies about her lies. Nice.

Once again, I am stunned at the left’s lack of interest in what is a critically important character issue. If Elizabeth Warren was willing to lie about her ethnic background, cheat multiple affirmative action programs, and steal a job at Harvard from someone who was really a discriminated-against minority….that means she is willing to do anything to advance herself and her career. Lies mean nothing to her.

The way that the interviewer gets away with it is by totally mis-characterizing the situation was and the facts of her behavior, and then dismissing it all as no big deal. More and more doublespeak….when what people deserve is the truth.

Is it possible for Elizabeth Warren to make it through the next 4 1/2 months without ever being interviewed by someone who is objective and fact-oriented?

Like, say, an Independent???

Henry Hawkins | June 14, 2012 at 2:17 pm

In real life I’m 6’6″ and weigh 250 lbs. From now on I am declaring myself to be not human, but a giraffe. Free admission to zoos! Woo hoo!

    Likewise, my jack russell pound puppy is declaring himself an italian greyhound. He does have pretty long legs, and who are we to question what his mother may or may not have told him? Keep an eye out for us at Westminster next year!

“It’s funny, when you’re running for elective office, especially high elective office, you really — you have to pass a test. And the test is about truthfulness, credibility and honesty,” Brown said on “Fox & Friends.” “And quite frankly, she’s failed that test as evidenced by her claiming to be a Native American and checking the box and making misrepresentations to not only Harvard but Penn.”

The first-term senator added, “It’s no different here. She can rewrite her own history but she can’t rewrite mine.”

Heh.

Henry Hawkins | June 14, 2012 at 3:20 pm

The more I look at Elizabeth Warren, the more I suspect she’s lying. She looks a lot more Navajo than Cherokee.

    BannedbytheGuardian in reply to Henry Hawkins. | June 14, 2012 at 6:30 pm

    Haha . I am still pondering my Native Chief poster with 60 portraits to decide which I descend from .

    One Navajo chief called Cayayanita has a similar hairstyle to Liz but with more feathers.

    I am leaning towards a composite.. When I make my decision I will inform LI.

    persecutor in reply to Henry Hawkins. | June 14, 2012 at 6:38 pm

    And she lies like a Navajo rug, so there you have it!

    WarEagle82 in reply to Henry Hawkins. | June 14, 2012 at 10:07 pm

    When I think of Lizzie her politics make me think more of Bund Deutscher Mädel than Native American.

    If she is Cherokee then I am Chinese-Norwegian-African. Which box do I check on my Harvard application?

    And Scarborough is a major moron, nearly on par with Juan Williams. He got run off the radio in DC cause he was too wishy-washy even for this place! That says something.

Nonsense. She’s obviously a pure-bred member of the Miuayga* tribe.

* make it up as you go along

Net worth for American families has dropped 38% in three years…”

So… that means we should elect a liar and Obamaphile?

When she says families are getting hammered, does she mean getting drunk? I might have to reschedule my family reunion. Sounds like a fun place.

If the cat has kittens in the oven, you dont call them biscuits. She can have all the high cheekbones she wants, have all the “family stories” she wants, it dont make her an Indian.

I wonder if her family told her about Santa and the Tooth Fairy, too? If so, is she sticking by those claims, as well?

And the sad thing, it will not change the vote. She still has a good chance on winning.

She rips apart GE in a commercial, MSNBC will run the debate sponsered by Vicki Kennedy? Awkward.

Surprised Brokaw agreed to moderate.

    deadrody in reply to ReneeA. | June 14, 2012 at 8:44 pm

    Scott Brown has yet to agree to that one. Funny thing in the Herald this morning, they claim the Kennedy Center is “not a Democratic institution”.

    Talk about a legitimate LOL on that one. Isn’t that like claiming the sky ISN’T blue ? Come on.

full-throated support | June 14, 2012 at 6:05 pm

So, you people don’t think it’s almost worth seeing leftist socially-constructed Indian Elizabeth Warren promoted at Harvard and then on to the Senate just to see Ward Churchill’s discomfiture?

He must be devastated by the unfairness of it all, because he at least wore fringed leather jackets.

BannedbytheGuardian | June 14, 2012 at 6:36 pm

You guys are all looking backward . Look FORWARD to authenticate heritage.

Barack snr & Stanley met whilst they were marching across the bridge in Selma 1963 . Two years earlier Obama was born.

So there.you retards.

    BannedbytheGuardian in reply to BannedbytheGuardian. | June 14, 2012 at 8:01 pm

    In case this went over any heads – America has already accepted that you can be born before your parents met . Otherwise this strange paragraph would be the ‘birther’ thing not ‘where’.

    But now it is possible to be conceived after your parents death or even before they met.

    ((% of auto Biographies are either dreadful and/ or lies . The future does not look good.

And Lizzie gives this story legs for a sixth week! She’s the gift that keeps on giving!

1. Palin’s and Warren’s manners of speaking are similar (though Palin’s voice is higher). Both drop g’s and stress vowels. Not surprising since they were both born in the West.

But the MSM derides Palin and worships Warren. I guess the incandescence of Warren’s intellect blinds the MSM to her accent. What else could the reason be? 😉

2. I applaud how Bill, Anne, and others are exposing Warren’s character. Bravo. Keep it up.

But I caution, again, that character is a secondary issue to MA voters. So what if I’m a warped dishonest creep? I’ll be a warped dishonest creep on your behalf. During modern times the electorate of “enlightened” Massachusetts has repeatedly and routinely bought this line.

3. In a squeaker MA election, Warren should get the benefit of the doubt, for reasons both legitimate and illegitimate. And it’s supposedly a rule of thumb that voters who haven’t decided by Election Day usually break against the incumbent.

4. My point is not to deprecate the exposure of Warren’s character. On the contrary, I hope that a lot more evidence comes out. However, I’ve used the term necessary but insufficient. For the race to tilt decisively against Warren, MA independent voters must be persuaded that Warren will make them worse off if she gets into the Senate. The point, I suppose, is to discredit Warren’s professed noble intentions by exposing what the actual effects of her policies will be.

    deadrody in reply to gs. | June 14, 2012 at 8:47 pm

    3. In a squeaker MA election, Warren should get the benefit of the doubt, for reasons both legitimate and illegitimate. And it’s supposedly a rule of thumb that voters who haven’t decided by Election Day usually break against the incumbent.

    Not true at all. The exact OPPOSITE is usually true. On election day, about 2/3 of undecideds break FOR the incumbent.

      1. I used the term “supposedly a rule of thumb” to indicate that the result is not ironclad.

      2. I googled before posting my recollection of conventional wisdom, and found hyperlinks consistent with my impression. Here is one.

Henry Hawkins | June 14, 2012 at 10:30 pm

I blame Warren for her lies, but do not blame her for sticking by them. Once she was outed for falsifying her heritage she had two choices, (1)cop to the lie, try to explain it, and suffer the consequences, or (b) quadruple down on her lies and damn the torpedoes. I’d say the latter is minutely more survivable than the latter, but either option was likely to cost her the election.

-Warren is from Oklahoma
-Oklahoma was settled to a large degree by northern
Europeans
-Northern Europeans are known for high cheekbones (too)
-Warren’s physical features are textbook northern European
-Hence, Warren is… Cherokee?

    TrooperJohnSmith in reply to Henry Hawkins. | June 14, 2012 at 11:26 pm

    I’m not sure where you get your demographics, but Oklahoma was settled by a lot of folks that had missed out on the cheap or free land elsewhere. This included a former sharecroppers from down south, poor people, especially from Missouri and Tennessee, freed slaves, mixed-blooded people called ‘half-breed’ elsewhere and a lot of people generally down on their luck.

    My own grandfather crossed the Red River with his dirt-poor family in the winter of 1895-96 at the age of 4 to become one of the real Sooners, eventually settling in a dug-out house on unclaimed ground near what became Healdon.

    During all my time in Oklahoma, I’ve never noticed a significant number of Swedes, Finns, ‘Weegies or Danes. The Germans, mostly in south Oklahoma, migrated up from Texas. I’d suggest that Oklahoma is probably much more of a melting pot than any other state in the west.

    I’d also suggest that Ms. Warren’s high cheekbones could be Irish, Nordic or maybe even Indian. It’s irrelevant. Cheekbones don’t mean diddly-squat to Indian ancestry. If they did, I’d at least be gettin’ me some ‘a that Casino money somewhere! 😉

    “Elizabeth Warren! I’ve known Indians all my life and you madam, are no Indian!”

Political slogan for Elizabeth Warren:

“Feelings, not facts”

This might annoy Massachusetts voters:

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2011/10/elizabeth-warren-once-a-republican/

“It turns out that Elizabeth Warren, the Massachusetts Senate candidate who has a special knack for agitating Republicans, used to be one of them.

“I was a Republican, because I thought that those were the people who best supported markets. I think that is not true anymore,” said Elizabeth Warren in an interview with The Daily Beast.”

Apparently Warren was a registered Republican well into her 40s. Funny how that doesn’t get mentioned…that she was a Republican for almost 30 years.

She is 62 now, so does that mean that she was a Republican until she moved to Massachusetts for the Harvard job?

    Funny how that doesn’t get mentioned…that she was a Republican for almost 30 years

    Unless someone can confirm that via voter rolls, I’m notsomuch inclined to believe it. She’s lied about so much else, why not this too?

    Maybe she’s trying her hand at being a ‘concern troll’.

      TrooperJohnSmith in reply to s_dog. | June 15, 2012 at 3:11 pm

      I’m not sure about Oklahoma, but in Texas, no one is registered to a political party.

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend