logo 
spacer
  

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

If you have an opinion, you should share it! Register Now!

America's Debate hosts the best in news, government, and political debate. Register now to take part in the most civil and constructive debate on the Internet. Join the community, and get ready to be challenged!

Click here to start

> Sponsored Links

Register to remove these ads!
> Elizabeth Warren, Too fraudulent to be elected?
akaCG
post May 12 2012, 05:28 PM
Post #1


*********
Advanced Senior Contributor

Sponsor
August 2012

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 4,846
Member No.: 10,787
Joined: November-25-09

Gender: Male
Politics: Conservative
Party affiliation: Independent



Many if not most of us have heard of Ms. Warren's now debunked claims to Cherokee heritage and employment thereof during her academic career.

It now appears that the integrity of her scholarship leaves a lot to be desired as well, to put it mildly:
QUOTE
...
... Claiming to be an "authority" on bankruptcy law, Warren has written papers and books wildly inflating the role medical bills play in personal bankruptcies.

A Northwestern University peer review of her 2005 paper on the subject, for example, ripped it apart, arguing "the methods were so poor they gave cover to those who want to dismiss the problems of the uninsured — they can say the only paper out there uses a suspect method."
...
ABC News suggested she was exercising a hidden agenda to promote a government-run health system. Sure enough, President Obama in 2009 seized on her findings to argue for socialized medicine: "The cost of health care now causes a bankruptcy in America every 30 seconds."
...
In 2010, as Obama was floating Warren's name as someone to run his new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, "The Atlantic" magazine reviewed her academic work and found a disturbing "pattern" of using bogus metrics to inflate the case for left-wing causes. "Deeply, deeply flawed," it said of her research. "This isn't Harvard (Law) caliber material — not even Harvard undergraduate."
...

Link: http://news.investors.com/article/610773/2...igor.htm?p=full

Ms. Warren is currently running for the office of U.S. Senator from Massachussetts, hoping to unseat Republican Scott Brown.

Questions:

1. Do you think these revelations (both regarding her heritage and the integrity of her scholarship) will cause her to lose the election? Why or why not?

2. Do you think these revelations (both regarding her heritage and the integrity of her scholarship) should cause her to lose the election? Why or why not?

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
7 Pages V  < 1 2 3 4 > »   
Start new topic
Replies (20 - 39)
akaCG
post May 14 2012, 12:31 AM
Post #21


*********
Advanced Senior Contributor

Sponsor
August 2012

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 4,846
Member No.: 10,787
Joined: November-25-09

Gender: Male
Politics: Conservative
Party affiliation: Independent



QUOTE(Raptavio @ May 13 2012, 07:22 PM) *
Oy vey yourself.

http://articles.boston.com/2012-05-12/news...vard-law-school

QUOTE
Officials at the colleges where she worked said the question of her heritage either didn’t come up, or had no effect on their hiring decision.

...

I woudn't have expected them to say anything else. I can only imagine the grief (including the lawsuit kind) they would catch from the Native American community as a result of a spot that would have gone to a real Native American going to someone whose claims to Native American heritage have been demonstrated to be bogus.

QUOTE(Raptavio @ May 13 2012, 07:22 PM) *
...
Perhaps it's time for you, akaCG, to present evidence that her hiring at any of the universities in question had anything to do with a claimed Native American heritage.
...

The evidence I've presented is quite sufficient for reasonable suspicion thereof, especially when coupled with Ms. Warren's meandering explanations. This ain't either a civil or a criminal trial matter, and we're not in a courtroom.

QUOTE(Raptavio @ May 13 2012, 07:22 PM) *
...
Also, an organization that refuses to get involved in a right-wing witch hunt is not, as described by you and the article you cited, running away or backing down. They're treating yellow journalism and idiotic politics as they should be treated.

Nah. They got caught biting claiming more than they could chew show and changing their story a couple of times as a result. And it didn't even take 11 Associated Press "fact checkers" to do it. So now, they're clamming up.

Mike Wallace would have approved. Well, maybe not, since it involves a Liberal politician involved in a tight election against a Republican.

This post has been edited by akaCG: May 14 2012, 12:38 AM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Raptavio
post May 14 2012, 01:33 AM
Post #22


*********
Advanced Senior Contributor

Group: Members
Posts: 3,515
Member No.: 10,458
Joined: April-27-09

From: Rosemount, MN
Gender: Male
Politics: Very Liberal
Party affiliation: Democrat



Right, akaCG's evidence is nil, and nil, and weasels by calling it 'reasonable' suspicion.

Done here.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
akaCG
post May 14 2012, 01:48 AM
Post #23


*********
Advanced Senior Contributor

Sponsor
August 2012

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 4,846
Member No.: 10,787
Joined: November-25-09

Gender: Male
Politics: Conservative
Party affiliation: Independent



QUOTE(Raptavio @ May 13 2012, 09:33 PM) *
Right, akaCG's evidence is nil, and nil, and weasels by calling it 'reasonable' suspicion.

Done here.

Heh.

Having not been able to deal with the evidence pointing to the fraudulence of Ms. Warren's claims to Native American heritage and the shoddiness of her academic research work-product, which this thread is about (check out the OP), you declare that you're "Done here."

How utterly "shocking".

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
AuthorMusician
post May 14 2012, 11:04 AM
Post #24


**********
Glasses and journalism work for me.

Sponsor
November 2003

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 6,378
Member No.: 297
Joined: December-1-02

From: Blueberry Hill
Gender: Male
Politics: Liberal
Party affiliation: Democrat



QUOTE(akaCG @ May 13 2012, 09:48 PM) *
QUOTE(Raptavio @ May 13 2012, 09:33 PM) *
Right, akaCG's evidence is nil, and nil, and weasels by calling it 'reasonable' suspicion.

Done here.

Heh.

Having not been able to deal with the evidence pointing to the fraudulence of Ms. Warren's claims to Native American heritage and the shoddiness of her academic research work-product, which this thread is about (check out the OP), you declare that you're "Done here."

How utterly "shocking".


Yeah, your mind is made up and there's nothing more that can be said about that. You have failed to show that Warren misused her documented Native American blood, or at lest what we actually know about it indicates documentation of some sort, for her own personal gain. The directory listing had nothing to do with her being hired, and it can be argued that she indeed is considered a minority -- a woman -- for such things as SBA loans, had she ever applied for such. Within the context of her job, she probably was in the minority.

Warren's family goes way back in this country, apparently. So does mine, to the French-Canadian bloodline on my father's side. Due to the lack of European women during the frontier days, many men took Native American wives, and since there were no county records at the time, the bloodlines went undocumented. I suspect this is so from other evidence, such as an expert hunter/trapper/trader as a brother, another brother who had the classic Native American nose and some other empirical observations, similar to the high cheekbone thing.

I suppose Warren could get a DNA test to prove to you that she is right and you are wrong, but why? It's obvious that your mind is made up, and that is that. There's no vote to be gained, nor any votes to be lost if she merely ignores this barking noise from the far right from here on out.

I suppose this can be said: The swiftboating of Warren failed, but that will be more certain after Brown gets sent packing.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
akaCG
post May 14 2012, 04:21 PM
Post #25


*********
Advanced Senior Contributor

Sponsor
August 2012

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 4,846
Member No.: 10,787
Joined: November-25-09

Gender: Male
Politics: Conservative
Party affiliation: Independent



QUOTE(AuthorMusician @ May 14 2012, 07:04 AM) *
...
... You have failed to show that Warren misused her documented Native American blood, or at lest what we actually know about it indicates documentation of some sort, for her own personal gain.
...

1. There is no documentation backing up Warren's claim of Native American blood that wouldn't be laughed out of any self-respecting genealogy "court":
QUOTE
...
No reputable genealogist or genealogical organization would ever use a family newsletter by an amateur genealogist as the basis for an opinion. They require direct documentation from a certified copy of a birth or marriage certificate or some other objective evidence. While family newsletters, or family web postings may provide a useful tip as to where the real documentation may be, they are just as likely to be dead wrong encrustations of family myth that may or may not be true, but can’t be proven.
While family members may find these myths of interest, professionals like the New England Historic Genealogical Society and Christopher Child, or the New York Genealogical and Biographical Society, where I have served on the Heraldry Committee, will not accept them as documentation for any kind of genealogical claim. And they certainly won’t take a chance of embarrassing themselves professionally by making a public statement on the basis of flimsy evidence they regard as little more than rumor.
...
... what in the world did the more than 160 year old New England Historic Genealogical Society and its genealogist Christopher Child think they were doing taking what they knew was only a family rumor, putting their own reputation behind it, and plastering it all over the press?
...
... now that the actual document has surfaced, attested to by the local state officer in charge of these vital records, they have refused to comment or revise their much-ballyhooed statements to the press on Warren’s Cherokee heritage. If they continue to do so, they will have gone well beyond making a professional error.
...
... barring a recantation, it appears the venerable New England Historic Genealogical Society and Christopher Child have colluded in an election fraud upon the people of Massachusetts to publicly and repeatedly advantage a candidate from the Harvard Law School for political office at the expense of their own professional standards and the evidence now staring them in the face. It is time for the press to call them to account.
...

Link: http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2012...ssion-contd.php

Well, fat chance of that last bit happening.

2.
Whether Warren (and Penn and Harvard) gamed the affirmative action system is a side issue in this thread, one which has been foisted onto it by your side (beginning with post #5), as a way to avoid addressing in any substantive way the two issues brought up in the opening post (Warren's claim of Native American blood and the quality of her academic work).

Do I think that Warren (and Penn and Harvard) did indeed game the affirmative action system? Yup. Do I have "beyond a reasonable doubt" type evidence thereof? Nope. No more than you have "beyond a reasonable doubt" type evidence to support the following:
QUOTE(AuthorMusician @ May 14 2012, 07:04 AM) *
...
... The directory listing had nothing to do with her being hired, ...
...

But there IS at least "preponderance of evidence"-level support for the claim that Warren is no more Native American than the average lily white blue eyed Oklahoman whose family history goes back to the late 1800s. And there IS at least "preponderance of evidence"-level support for the claim that Warren's scholarship (the medical bankruptcy research that put her on the academic "map" and made her a hero of the Left, anyway) is woefully shoddy at best and perhaps even Bellesiles-level fraudulent at worst.

And I have provided it.

And what has been the response? A smorgasbord of (paraphrasing) "Doesn't matter. Her intentions are good.", "Eh. Big dealio. Academics criticize each other's work all the time.", "Foxrightwingblogspropagandawitchhuntyellowjournalismechochamberwaronwomenli
es, so there."

Mighty "impressive", gotta say.

QUOTE(AuthorMusician @ May 14 2012, 07:04 AM) *
...
... and it can be argued that she indeed is considered a minority -- a woman -- for such things as SBA loans, had she ever applied for such. Within the context of her job, she probably was in the minority.
...

Yes, that can indeed be argued. Risibly. Not least, of course, because it has nothing whatsoever to do with her claim of Native American blood.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
AuthorMusician
post May 14 2012, 06:27 PM
Post #26


**********
Glasses and journalism work for me.

Sponsor
November 2003

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 6,378
Member No.: 297
Joined: December-1-02

From: Blueberry Hill
Gender: Male
Politics: Liberal
Party affiliation: Democrat



QUOTE(akaCG @ May 14 2012, 12:21 PM) *
Yes, that can indeed be argued. Risibly. Not least, of course, because it has nothing whatsoever to do with her claim of Native American blood.


Just for grins, when did she claim this and in what context? Are you only going by a directory entry? And was she actually listed as a Native American or merely as a minority faculty member? I'm wondering how much of this hand-to-mouth disease is self-inflicted.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Raptavio
post May 14 2012, 08:03 PM
Post #27


*********
Advanced Senior Contributor

Group: Members
Posts: 3,515
Member No.: 10,458
Joined: April-27-09

From: Rosemount, MN
Gender: Male
Politics: Very Liberal
Party affiliation: Democrat



On the 2010 "The Atlantic" report by Megan McArdle attacking Warren's scholarship, cited by the hit piece in Investors.com at the top of this article:

http://www.rooseveltinstitute.org/new-roos...n-s-scholarship

Submitted for your consideration.

Was McArdle's critique valid peer review, or just a shoddy hit job of its own?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Paladin Elspeth
post May 14 2012, 08:13 PM
Post #28


*********
I want the 10th Doctor for President!

Sponsor
August 1, 2003

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 4,987
Member No.: 721
Joined: May-10-03

From: Between 2 Great Lakes
Gender: Female
Politics: Liberal
Party affiliation: Democrat



QUOTE(Raptavio @ May 14 2012, 04:03 PM) *
On the 2010 "The Atlantic" report by Megan McArdle attacking Warren's scholarship, cited by the hit piece in Investors.com at the top of this article:

http://www.rooseveltinstitute.org/new-roos...n-s-scholarship

Submitted for your consideration.

Was McArdle's critique valid peer review, or just a shoddy hit job of its own?

Looks like McArdle needs to reconsider calling other people hacks. Thank you for the link.

And while we're at it, just what were Scott Brown's credentials for recommending him to the U.S. Senate in the first place? After all, he is the one whom Ms. Warren hopes to replace.

Has Scott Brown laid claim to any sort of gravitas?

This post has been edited by Paladin Elspeth: May 14 2012, 08:17 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Raptavio
post May 14 2012, 08:16 PM
Post #29


*********
Advanced Senior Contributor

Group: Members
Posts: 3,515
Member No.: 10,458
Joined: April-27-09

From: Rosemount, MN
Gender: Male
Politics: Very Liberal
Party affiliation: Democrat



On Dranove's rebuke of the 2005 report of which Warren was a co-author:

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2009/...edical-bankrup/

QUOTE
Dranove took $5,000 from the nation’s health insurance industry for his report, which he says he now regrets for the criticism of his impartiality it’s engendered.


Also, Himmelstein, Warren, et. al., tore apart Dranove's rebuke as well: http://content.healthaffairs.org/content/25/2/w84.abstract

From the above ABCnews link:
QUOTE
Himmelstein’s referred me to a 2006 paper in which he replied to Dranove, whom he accuses of “several out and out errors.” Says Himmelstein: “They were paid by the insurance industry to make this critique… They were hired guns out to try and make a point, and used a variety of illegitimate techniques to make that point.”

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Amlord
post May 14 2012, 09:09 PM
Post #30


Group Icon

**********
The Roaring Lion

Sponsor

Group: Moderators
Posts: 5,884
Member No.: 572
Joined: March-4-03

From: Cleveland suburbs, OH
Gender: Male
Politics: Conservative
Party affiliation: Republican



1. Do you think these revelations (both regarding her heritage and the integrity of her scholarship) will cause her to lose the election? Why or why not?

Her heritage is irrelevant. I'll take her at her word that she has Cherokee in her blood.

Her scholarship is debatable but being a great scholar does not lead to being an effective politician. I do think it is the more relevant issue, however, because it shows her mindset: that the medical system in this country is broken. Some voters in Massachusetts may prefer this type of politician while I do not.

2. Do you think these revelations (both regarding her heritage and the integrity of her scholarship) should cause her to lose the election? Why or why not?

The heritage piece is likely to have more traction. Ordinary voters aren't focused on whether Elizabeth Warren is a good lawyer or a good researcher.

Like it or not, this is the type of hit piece journalism that might cause a close election to go against her. Who knows what Massachusetts voters place emphasis on? Probably the sensationalism of claiming to be a minority is my guess.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
BoF
post May 14 2012, 09:19 PM
Post #31


**********
Giga-bite: "I catch mice & rats - 2 & 4 legs."

Sponsor
October 2004

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 6,126
Member No.: 3,423
Joined: August-14-04

From: Texas
Gender: Male
Politics: Liberal
Party affiliation: Democrat



QUOTE(Amlord @ May 14 2012, 04:09 PM) *
Like it or not, this is the type of hit piece journalism that might cause a close election to go against her. Who knows what Massachusetts voters place emphasis on? Probably the sensationalism of claiming to be a minority is my guess.


There is also a possibility that the negativity may backfire.

Right now it looks too close to call.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/20...arren-2093.html

One of the things political scientist will try to answer in the next decade or so, is whether all the negativity and money unleashed by Citizens United has diminishing returns.


(edited to remove unconstructive profanity reference)

This post has been edited by Mrs. Pigpen: May 15 2012, 12:36 AM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Raptavio
post May 14 2012, 10:03 PM
Post #32


*********
Advanced Senior Contributor

Group: Members
Posts: 3,515
Member No.: 10,458
Joined: April-27-09

From: Rosemount, MN
Gender: Male
Politics: Very Liberal
Party affiliation: Democrat



QUOTE(Amlord @ May 14 2012, 04:09 PM) *
1. Do you think these revelations (both regarding her heritage and the integrity of her scholarship) will cause her to lose the election? Why or why not?

Her heritage is irrelevant. I'll take her at her word that she has Cherokee in her blood.

Her scholarship is debatable but being a great scholar does not lead to being an effective politician. I do think it is the more relevant issue, however, because it shows her mindset: that the medical system in this country is broken. Some voters in Massachusetts may prefer this type of politician while I do not.

2. Do you think these revelations (both regarding her heritage and the integrity of her scholarship) should cause her to lose the election? Why or why not?

The heritage piece is likely to have more traction. Ordinary voters aren't focused on whether Elizabeth Warren is a good lawyer or a good researcher.

Like it or not, this is the type of hit piece journalism that might cause a close election to go against her. Who knows what Massachusetts voters place emphasis on? Probably the sensationalism of claiming to be a minority is my guess.



It's a rare moment when Amlord posts something where I largely agree with him. This is one of those times. The only place we differ is that I agree with Dr. Warren that the medical system in this country is broken.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
AuthorMusician
post May 15 2012, 01:10 PM
Post #33


**********
Glasses and journalism work for me.

Sponsor
November 2003

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 6,378
Member No.: 297
Joined: December-1-02

From: Blueberry Hill
Gender: Male
Politics: Liberal
Party affiliation: Democrat



QUOTE(Raptavio @ May 14 2012, 06:03 PM) *
QUOTE(Amlord @ May 14 2012, 04:09 PM) *
1. Do you think these revelations (both regarding her heritage and the integrity of her scholarship) will cause her to lose the election? Why or why not?

Her heritage is irrelevant. I'll take her at her word that she has Cherokee in her blood.

Her scholarship is debatable but being a great scholar does not lead to being an effective politician. I do think it is the more relevant issue, however, because it shows her mindset: that the medical system in this country is broken. Some voters in Massachusetts may prefer this type of politician while I do not.

2. Do you think these revelations (both regarding her heritage and the integrity of her scholarship) should cause her to lose the election? Why or why not?

The heritage piece is likely to have more traction. Ordinary voters aren't focused on whether Elizabeth Warren is a good lawyer or a good researcher.

Like it or not, this is the type of hit piece journalism that might cause a close election to go against her. Who knows what Massachusetts voters place emphasis on? Probably the sensationalism of claiming to be a minority is my guess.



It's a rare moment when Amlord posts something where I largely agree with him. This is one of those times. The only place we differ is that I agree with Dr. Warren that the medical system in this country is broken.


Yes, and now Maddow is showing the clear difference between Brown and Warren: Brown is a Wall Street one-percenter surrogate who wants the taxpayer to pay for financial screw ups by the big shots, which he pulled off after the Meltdown of 2008. Warren wants to protect the rest of us from the breathtaking stupidity of the big shots, the cons who believe their own cons. It's in Maddow's opening clip from last night, which I just saw, so 5/14/12. Today is 5/15, and it's a nice sunny morning in Paradise (really, that's the name of this area).

This explains why these non-issues about Warren are so desperately promoted. The facts are against Brown's election, and his supporters know it. Ergo, they must attack Warren however they can, and this pathetic showing says volumes about how meager the pickings are. What's rather surprising is that the contest is so close right now, but let's just say that there is still plenty of time to publicly air Brown's record versus Warren's. I don't think the electorate of Massachusetts will be impressed with Brown. Rather the opposite. He did replace Ted Kennedy you know, one of the most reviled liberals of all time just about everywhere but the state in which he was reelected so many times, the state that forced Romney to go liberal in order to become governor.

I think the brown floater is about to be flushed.

This post has been edited by AuthorMusician: May 15 2012, 01:12 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
BoF
post May 15 2012, 03:55 PM
Post #34


**********
Giga-bite: "I catch mice & rats - 2 & 4 legs."

Sponsor
October 2004

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 6,126
Member No.: 3,423
Joined: August-14-04

From: Texas
Gender: Male
Politics: Liberal
Party affiliation: Democrat



QUOTE(trumpetplayer @ May 13 2012, 07:23 PM) *

Oh, I suppose both Warren and Brown have much to explain to the people of Massachusetts.

They don’t have a damned thing to explain to the sleazy Tucker Carlson or his equally sleazy electronic rag, The Daily Caller, or for that matter Investors.com.

The information - or propaganda spewing, emotion riling - sewers some people swim in never ceases to amaze me.

This post has been edited by BoF: May 15 2012, 04:04 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Ted
post May 16 2012, 02:19 PM
Post #35


***********
Ten Thousand Club

Sponsor
February 2007

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 11,416
Member No.: 1,807
Joined: November-20-03

From: Mass.
Gender: Male
Politics: Conservative
Party affiliation: Independent



QUOTE(BoF @ May 15 2012, 11:55 AM) *
QUOTE(trumpetplayer @ May 13 2012, 07:23 PM) *

Oh, I suppose both Warren and Brown have much to explain to the people of Massachusetts.

They don’t have a damned thing to explain to the sleazy Tucker Carlson or his equally sleazy electronic rag, The Daily Caller, or for that matter Investors.com.

The information - or propaganda spewing, emotion riling - sewers some people swim in never ceases to amaze me.

so Bof - its ok to chase down Romney high school classmates and publish the little dirt they could dig up but its "sleazy" to question statements and actions by Warren? this goes well beyond "high school".

Its fair game and it will have an impact here in my state. She will lose to Brown. and imo it will not even be close
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
BoF
post May 16 2012, 08:54 PM
Post #36


**********
Giga-bite: "I catch mice & rats - 2 & 4 legs."

Sponsor
October 2004

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 6,126
Member No.: 3,423
Joined: August-14-04

From: Texas
Gender: Male
Politics: Liberal
Party affiliation: Democrat



QUOTE(Ted @ May 16 2012, 09:19 AM) *
QUOTE(BoF @ May 15 2012, 11:55 AM) *
QUOTE(trumpetplayer @ May 13 2012, 07:23 PM) *

Oh, I suppose both Warren and Brown have much to explain to the people of Massachusetts.

They don’t have a damned thing to explain to the sleazy Tucker Carlson or his equally sleazy electronic rag, The Daily Caller, or for that matter Investors.com.

The information - or propaganda spewing, emotion riling - sewers some people swim in never ceases to amaze me.

so Bof - its ok to chase down Romney high school classmates and publish the little dirt they could dig up but its "sleazy" to question statements and actions by Warren? this goes well beyond "high school".

Its fair game and it will have an impact here in my state. She will lose to Brown. and imo it will not even be close

Unlike many of us, you do have a vote to use against Elizabeth Warren.

You may be right about the outcome, but …

Meanwhile, welcome back and enjoy your swim.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Ted
post May 16 2012, 08:55 PM
Post #37


***********
Ten Thousand Club

Sponsor
February 2007

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 11,416
Member No.: 1,807
Joined: November-20-03

From: Mass.
Gender: Male
Politics: Conservative
Party affiliation: Independent



QUOTE(BoF @ May 16 2012, 04:54 PM) *
QUOTE(Ted @ May 16 2012, 09:19 AM) *
QUOTE(BoF @ May 15 2012, 11:55 AM) *
QUOTE(trumpetplayer @ May 13 2012, 07:23 PM) *

Oh, I suppose both Warren and Brown have much to explain to the people of Massachusetts.

They don’t have a damned thing to explain to the sleazy Tucker Carlson or his equally sleazy electronic rag, The Daily Caller, or for that matter Investors.com.

The information - or propaganda spewing, emotion riling - sewers some people swim in never ceases to amaze me.

so Bof - its ok to chase down Romney high school classmates and publish the little dirt they could dig up but its "sleazy" to question statements and actions by Warren? this goes well beyond "high school".

Its fair game and it will have an impact here in my state. She will lose to Brown. and imo it will not even be close

Unlike many of us, you do have a vote to use against Elizabeth Warren.

You may be right about the outcome, but …

Meanwhile, welcome back and enjoy your swim.

It will be close but imo Brown is doing a great job and will be re elected.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nighttimer
post May 16 2012, 09:19 PM
Post #38


*********
Advanced Senior Contributor

Sponsor
February 2007

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 4,660
Member No.: 504
Joined: February-16-03

Gender: Undisclosed
Politics: Undisclosed
Party affiliation: Undisclosed



Wanna see a new land speed record for flip-flopping? unsure.gif

Here's Ted at 10:19:

QUOTE(Ted @ May 16 2012, 10:19 AM) *
She will lose to Brown. and imo it will not even be close.


And here's Ted at 04:55 following a reality check by BoF:

QUOTE(Ted @ May 16 2012, 04:55 PM) *
It will be close but imo Brown is doing a great job and will be re elected.


Check back in a few hours when Ted next looks in his cracked crystal ball and proclaims, "Elizabeth Warren will be a great senator. Or she may not. In my opinion." wacko.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Ted
post May 16 2012, 09:22 PM
Post #39


***********
Ten Thousand Club

Sponsor
February 2007

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 11,416
Member No.: 1,807
Joined: November-20-03

From: Mass.
Gender: Male
Politics: Conservative
Party affiliation: Independent



QUOTE(nighttimer @ May 16 2012, 05:19 PM) *
Wanna see a new land speed record for flip-flopping? unsure.gif

Here's Ted at 10:19:

QUOTE(Ted @ May 16 2012, 10:19 AM) *
She will lose to Brown. and imo it will not even be close.


And here's Ted at 04:55 following a reality check by BoF:

QUOTE(Ted @ May 16 2012, 04:55 PM) *
It will be close but imo Brown is doing a great job and will be re elected.


Check back in a few hours when Ted next looks in his cracked crystal ball and proclaims, "Elizabeth Warren will be a great senator. Or she may not. In my opinion." wacko.gif

I said it MAY not even be close.

Nice try though. You have anything constructive to add?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
akaCG
post May 16 2012, 09:30 PM
Post #40


*********
Advanced Senior Contributor

Sponsor
August 2012

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 4,846
Member No.: 10,787
Joined: November-25-09

Gender: Male
Politics: Conservative
Party affiliation: Independent



QUOTE(Ted @ May 16 2012, 05:22 PM) *
...
I said it MAY not even be close.
...

C'mon, man. You did no such thing. Be a mensch, wouldja please?

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

7 Pages V  < 1 2 3 4 > » 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 

  
Go to the top of the page - Simple Version Time is now: December 12th, 2018 - 06:24 PM
©2002-2010 America's Debate, Inc.  All rights reserved.