Image 01 Image 03

Elizabeth Warren’s anti-gaffes matter

Elizabeth Warren’s anti-gaffes matter

Don’t believe the spin that Elizabeth Warren’s claims about being Native American don’t matter.  Or that she simply made a mistake in how she handled it.

This headline from U.S. News demonstrates how it is being played:

Warren Gaffes on Native American Roots Enflame Senate Race in Massachusetts

There was no gaffe as in mistake; there was a deliberate campaign of deception and evasion.

There also was not gaffe even in the Washington sense, which is when a politician tells the truth.

Warren’s statements have been anti-gaffes, not gaffes.

The text of the U.S. News article shows that the anti-gaffes matter in the election:

Massachusetts Sen. Scott Brown and his Democratic challenger  Elizabeth Warren are still deadlocked in recent polls, but their  campaigns may both be facing a critical turning point.

Andrew Smith, the pollster who conducted a recent Boston Globe  poll showing Brown with 39 percent support to Warren’s 37 percent, says  the Native American issue–Warren supposedly reaping professional  benefits from her claims of mixed blood–is likely more significant than  his poll seems to indicate.

According to the survey, nearly  3 in 4 voters said the controversy would not impact their vote. But of  the Democrats who say they are voting for Brown now, 43 percent said the  Native American issue makes them less likely to vote for Warren and 48  percent of the independents say the same, he says.

“If you  throw out the Republicans who were going to vote for Brown anyway and  the hardcore Democrats who were going to vote for Warren anyway, you  start to look at the 5 percent that’s going to make a difference in this  race–it’s really close,” Smith says. “It’s having an impact there.”

It matters.  Don’t let them tell you otherwise.


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.



Joe Biden is a gaffe-generator.

E. Warren is a pathological, spooky liar, who goes into brain-freeze when confronted by a reporter.

Like Obama, more exposure is NOT good for her.

Kinda like fish and house guests…

    scooby509 in reply to Ragspierre. | June 5, 2012 at 10:14 pm

    Very true, it’s a stupid cliche to assume all politicians are liars and that Warren is no worse. Her dishonesty is a deeply troubling character flaw.

    Biden is pretty much the archetype of a politician. The typical politician is a guy who is pretty smart, but not nearly as smart as his yesmen tell him, and the thing he loves most is to talk and BS with people and be the center of attention.

    And if you look at his campaign record, as with a lot of politicians, you’d find him frequently accused of lying, and you’d find lots of issues where he did a poor job of feigning enthusiasm, and you’d find plenty of cases where he over-promised, or tried to hide something embarrassing.

    But if you dug more, you’d also find there were a handful of issues he deeply cared about, and a lot of projects that he was very proud of and had put a lot of hard work into. You’d also find a ton of voters that he had listened to with surprising patience.

    That’s a typical politician. The ones that are really phony to the core or truly corrupt usually only stick around in a corrupt system where the voters have given up and cronyism runs things.

    Here’s hoping Massachusetts voters are disgusted enough by Warren to reject her. She’s a fundamentally dishonest person to lie about who she is, and that’s not at all the type of person that Americans elect to the Senate.

Does anyone know whether Warren reported as income the benefit of her interest free loan as opposed to the market interest rate?

No matter how hard they try, in the end, you can’t polish a turd.

LukeHandCool | June 5, 2012 at 4:36 pm

You know … I’m just an average dummy.

I’m no journalist nor do I have a doctorate in English (let alone a master’s in journalism … I doubt even Einstein would’ve attempted that great feat).

So, if I am to believe that the MSM does not have a liberal bias, then I can only conclude that they are extremely careless with the English language and tend (always, but just by coincidence that defies the laws of statistics) to err on the side that benefits the left.

My goodness. I don’t write for a living. But I find myself often to be much more accurate and careful with my native language than these “professionals.”

Again, this hinges on my taking them at their word and not ascribing any bias on their part as a cause for their ambiguous, often misleading writing, whether it is subconciously intentional or not.

My goodness. I grew up watching TV. Until I was 18 I could probably count with the fingers on one hand how many books I read.

I should read these MSM writers and marvel at their wordsmithing ways … but I almost always find myself thinking,

“Dude … seriously … is this the best you can do? You do this for a living? You’re actually paid to do this?”

I guess I shouldn’t be surprised. I see it’s not only run-of-the-mill journalists, but even journalism “specialists,” like “media critics,” … whose job is to be on top of all the latest that’s happening … but, but, but …

… but if you read Legal Insurrection, Instapundit, Powerline, Hot Air, Michelle Malkin and a few other blogs …

… you’ll always be miles and miles ahead of these journalistic rock stars.

You’ll be half way around the news world by the time they get their reporting trousers on (likely on backwards and inside-out).

Seriously mainstream media? Seiously?

I’m just an average dummy … and I’m really umimpressed with your work.

Love, A. Former Reader

Just remember your liberal-speak. When U.S. News uses the term ‘gaffe’ in the context of a democrat, they really mean “long-term campaign of fraud and deceit”.

“Gaffe?” Her statements are lies.

    LukeHandCool in reply to | June 5, 2012 at 4:50 pm

    When calling something a “gaffe” is in and of itself, a huge gaffe.

    Thank goodness they have those layers and layers and layers of editors and fact checkers they’re always telling us about.

    It’s just that, well, journalism isn’t exactly an exact science …

It matters. Don’t let them tell you otherwise.

Completely true…as far as it goes.

Necessary but not sufficient, a mathematician might respond.

TrooperJohnSmith | June 5, 2012 at 8:59 pm

Using a new tactic today, Elizabeth Warren spoke to reporters in her native Cherokee, which she studied while suckling a family of orphaned antelope while studying for the Nuh Joisey Bar Exam.

A reporter from the Boston News and Globe asked, “Mrs. Warren, can you address the allegations you are not of Cherokee descent?”

Warren replied, “Me no like’em white eyes that make’em bad talk about red woman. He speak’em forked tongue. Ancestors say, ‘Me Cherokee’! Ask’em next question!”

Chip Sweeney-Ellington III of the New Yorker then asked, “What of the totality of your Washington DC experience serves you in best stead to be a Senator from the Commonwealth?”

“When work’em in big government DC stone village, Me do’em many things. Me make’em big medicine. Me Write’em many laws. Smoke’em many peace pipe. Me work’em for Great Whi… errr, Great Brown Father in great White Tee-pee where he live’em. We have’em much talk. Help’em many people call’em Con-soo-mers by make’em biiiiig medicine against bad companies. Me like heap big con-soo-mer chief what have’em great magic.”

The tide may be turning. Finally, here is an article where the comments are written by educated liberals who are disgusted at Elizabeth Warren’s actions and incredulous at the mainstream media’s reaction:

“…my family claimed that my grandmother’s grandfather was full blooded Cherokee, that would make me 1/16 Cherokee- twice
that of Warren. Like you, I have never even considered claiming to be native American on an application, despite a career in education where that designation would have been extremely valuable. In fact, once I was hired and had the position held because the Dean wanted a minority for the position instead.

I am stunned that the left has been so sanguine about what is actually an incredibly dishonest and self-serving act. She is unfit for public office, period, and she should frankly be considered unfit for employment in academia as well.”

Many, many comments to that article are written by people who identify themselves as having law degrees and ivy league educations – bread and butter Democrats, in other words. They understand what Warren did by lying about her background and how she used those lies to grab the main chance and get her tenured job at Harvard Law.

To the people who run this blog: please keep pushing on this issue. The more people learn the specifics of Warren’s unethical behaviors (note my use of the plural) the more they will understand just how corrupt and incompetent the MA Democratic Part has become. How could they not have replaced her as a candidate when there was still the chance? How could they have run Marisa DeFranco out of the Democratic primary ticket, despite their ‘chosen candidate’ being exposed as a liar and a fraud? Doubling down indeed.

It’s not just conservatives who are sickened by Warren’s behavior, even though that is what the supine mainstream media is trying to pretend.

Elizabeth Warren can claim she is an African-American because thousands of years ago mankind developed from there.