In a Democratic Convention that featured a seemingly endless stream of speakers throwing red meat to the liberal base of the party in attendance at Charlotte, no one tilted farther to the left than Elizabeth Warren. The Harvard Law professor and Democratic Senate candidate was greeted enthusiastically by the delegates, who ate up her rant about the system being rigged against working people. However, as many have already pointed out, her speech seemed slightly out of place at a gathering in support of the party in power, rather than the opposition. Her hostility to the business world was also exactly what the Charlotte Democrats wanted to hear but the party’s corporate sponsors and major donors also could not have enjoyed it.
However, we should assume that Democratic donors are used to being abused by their party’s professional rabble-rousers and take the spectacle of a Harvard elitist masquerading as one of the hoi polloi with the bucket of salt that perhaps we should all employ when listening to Warren. Nevertheless, there was one group at the Democratic Convention that was not very happy with Professor Warren: Native Americans who still think she is a big phony for her bogus claim of Cherokee ancestry. As the New York Times reports today, Warren was the subject of some scathing comments by Native American delegates.
Karen Geronimo, the wife of the great-grandson of the Apache chief of the same name, said, “Someone needs to make her take a DNA test.” Echoing many of Warren’s critics, her husband said Warren only claimed Indian ancestry in order to “further her career.”
Jim LaPoint, a Sioux who is the great-grandnephew of Crazy Horse, suggested that Warren should be asked if she could speak her native language.
A member of the Nebraska delegation who is a member of the Winnebago tribe expressed similar cynicism about Warren’s claims and complained the candidate had no history of actually doing anything to help real Native Americans.
Warren blew off questions from the Times about the subject, but appears to be still clueless about why the story still has legs. The problem with Warren is not that her left-wing ideological approach is too liberal for Massachusetts. It’s that people sense she is a fake while her opponent, Senator Scott Brown, is authentic. It’s hard enough for a Harvard professor to pretend to be a member of the working class. For Warran to get caught posing as a Native American is still too juicy a story for even the liberal Times to pass up.
The smoke signals from Massachusetts suggest she may not win. n nWhat a waste of perfectly good cheekbones.
Thanks for this – I'll be laughing all day. I better keep it under control, though, because if any of my co-workers ask what's so funny, the truth would get me an eternity in professional purgatory.
Nonsense. I'm sure you'd be able to ask for a pow wow and bury the hatchet after the election.
Warren, Wasserman-Schulz and Fluke – what a combination
If only Wasserman-Schultz would condescend to have a single last name like the rest of us, they could have a great law firm name.
Well, they'll all need to do something when this is over. I think Debbie is going to have problems in her own district when the DNC drops her. As for Warren, she fits right in at Haarvaard. And I understand Sandra Fluke has accepted a lucrative offer to be an in house product tester for Magnum condoms.
The speaking list at this convention minus a few has been a conga line of unhappy people. The fake Cherokee Elizabeth Warren sounded like a Petty and angry shill but also spewed out rhetoric that time has passed by.
White man bad; rich white man worse. Redistribute the wealth and those stupid enough to pay taxes and too proud to be on food stamps, make them pay more. 1/32nd Cherokee – does that qualify for a casino license? Or even better, a tenured Professor's job at Haarvaard?
…Or to paraphrase another Massachusetts politician (so far not known to be blood related to Elizabeth Warren): Ask not what your remote ancestral tribe can do for you…
Everyone expects spin from politicians but outright and blatant lying should be a political death sentence. Every other claim to interviewers including saying the sky is blue should be responded to by the press with asking for proof due to their history of outright falsehood. Stephanie Cutter's claim about the widower from the Romney ad, Debbie Wasserman Shultz's claim about Ambassador Oren and the republicans, the decades long fraud by Warren and her ethnicity. It should cause the press to call them on more benign spin aggressively as the price they should pay for obvious falsehood. Generally, the press should allow people to speak and then put up opposing viewpoints but when there is adio or video proof of direct lying the gloves should come off.
I decided to watch Warren last night (after having to turn the TV off on Tuesday night) because I wanted to see what all the hub-bub was about. I have never seen someone in a speech appear so bitter. She seemed genuinely angry, like when you were a kid and you picked up your strange aunt's porcelain crap causing her to lecture you for the next hour (not that I have any experience with that). Kind of felt like I had to go sit in the corner after her speech was over. I hope the rest of the country felt the same way.
She was definitely on the warpath. I think she would have been politically happier born a Scandinavian. Perhaps a native Lap.
The reason this has staying power is that so many people know others who have been passed over or had to wait until minority quota hires and promotions were made. She gamed the system and even here in MA, people mistrust this Phoney-with-High Cheekbones.
The reason this has staying power is that so many people know others who have been passed over or had to wait until minority quota hires and promotions were made. She gamed the system and even here in MA there are many who see her as a fraud and a cheat. Brown is running a moderate, pleasant campaign featuring former elected Democrats ( no, not Barney Frank) against her stridency. It seems to be working. i ask Liberals, who still support Affirmative Action how they can stomach the fact that a true minority was passed over for this fraud.
But Warren has yet to have paper work or the family ancestery to back up her claim.
I agree that they get to decide, but I also need to see some honest attachment to the culture someone is claiming to be part of. (I'm assuming the Chief takes his background seriously, so good on him.) Heck, I'm apparently 1/16 Ojibwa, but I'd never think of using it to my advantage because, frankly, it means nothing to me (nor does the fact that I am also Scottish or 1/2 German). Warren was using this to her advantage even though it clearly means nothing to her on a personal level. Now that may be fine amongst liberals, but for those of with integrity it's problematic.