Click here to hear the show at 6pm Pacific. Tonight we’re talking about Axelrod and the battle of Boston, this week’s political news AND:
- Defections from/rebellions in the Dem Party following Booker rebuff & primary embarrassments
- unions boycotting Charlotte
- Artur Davis defecting to GOP
- Obama’s ‘bump’ with white women GONE
- pro pot upstart defeats Dem incumbent
- Marisa DeFranco gaining steam in Mass.
I urge everyone to compare Elizabeth Warren’s platform to that of Marisa DeFranco
http://elizabethwarren.com/
http://www.marisadefranco.com/
then compare their relative strenghts as candidates, public speakers, etc.
If, like me, you prefer DeFranco*, please send her a few bucks to help her in her fight against poltical backroom coronations..
* I also like that, while Warren uses that sickly ‘obama’ blue, DeFranco uses good, old American True Blue.
I sent her some dough today. She’s a scrappy chick. Interesting that WJC picked her.
Poked around a bit. De Franco seems self involved. She talks about herself constantly in the clips I saw. Warren seems to be more about principles than personalities. I’m still a Warren guy.
It’s also a matter of character and trustworthiness. Lie-awatha’s ‘evolution’ –
– On listing herself as native american:
1. I never told Harvard or Penn that I was a minority
2. I had no clue Harvard or Penn ever listed me as a minority
3. I only found that out two weeks ago by reading it in the paper
4. Ok, I did know way before that, but I still never told them I was a minority
4. Alright, I did check the ‘minority’ box on my application, but I didn’t understand what it meant
5. Actually, I listed myself as a minority to connect with other (31/32 white) people like me
6. Fair cop — I did tell Harvard, but only over lunch, like totally AFTER they hired me
7. ???
– On her native american ancestry:
1. I’m a member of the Cherokee tribe (min. 1/16 descent)
2. I’m not a member, but I’m 1/32 Cherokee
3. I’m sort of an honorary member, having contributed recipes to their cookbook
4. I’m Cherokee because, when I was a little girl, there was a photo in my house of a woman with high cheek bones
5. I’m Cherokee because, when I was a little girl, I wished I had high cheek bones, too
6. I’m Cherokee because, when I was a little girl, I had a 45 of Cher’s “Half-Breed” *
7. I’m also part Delaware
* (I made that one up)
DeFranco strikes me as a Soprano (the show, not the singer). Careful with that allegiance.
Just because she’s a dago, a wop, a guinea?
I’m sorry, did I just get all racist stereoptypy?
Say WHAAAAT, Jay? I can only hope that was a (very poor) joke about DeFranco
I don’t know her heritage. If she conforms to a stereotype it’s not my problem. It’s how she strikes me.
^ Anonymous was me. Krimminies.
Loved the comment about Romney being ‘not scary’. It does describe the feelings of a lot of voters. Perception is reality, However, Romney could turn out to actually Be scary, but that’s a different argument.
The scariest thing about Obama is his inability to learn from his mistakes, so sure is he of his own legend. He likely has the emotional maturity of a deluded ten year old, complete with finger pointing and whining. Somebody needs a ‘time out’, as do some of his supporters.
I am starting to wonder if Liberalism has run its’ course, at least in the near term. As dear Peggy said,
‘sooner or later you run out of other peoples’ money’.
Tamer, my dh and I both have high cheekbones, as do all our kids, we are both of Celt or Northern European descent. We can get sunburned in a downpour. None of our ancestors even traveled West of the Mississippi or lived near an Indian reservation..Nor did they visit Asia, they were kind of stick in the muds’ when it came to adventure. So how do we disappoint our grandchildren and tell them they can’t claim minority status to get more goodies? {{sigh}}
I heartily recommend Bryan Sykes “Blood of the Isles”. It uses genetic evidence to enlighten the History & Lore of the “British” Isles. Although it’s hard science, it’s a treat to read, fast-moving, and a playful romp through 11,000 years of the human experience.
Great show John! I sense a new tagline for your blog — “I’m not psychic, but I make predictions.”
I’m kind of surprised so many are turning on Elizabeth Warren over something so relatively minor.
Agreed.
How is gaming the system “relatively minor”? Her claims of minority status at Harvard had two effects: 1) it robbed someone who had actual minority status of opportunity and 2) allowed Harvard cover to continue its lily white hiring practices for another decade, this in the midst of being confronted on same? How is that minor? And how is her dogged insistence on her story despite all evidence to the contrary not important? Doesn’t it speak to her character? Who else will she collude with and on what? And will she react the same way when caught in another scandal of collusion?
I supported Warren. I unequivocally support more women in elective office, and I don’t even mind having women with whom I disagree get elected if it increases those numbers. What I can’t abide is a blatant display or corrupt privilege-seeking, collusion, cronyism, and continued lying. I can’t support that in a candidate of either gender. And it’s too much to overlook for the sake of increasing those numbers. My 2 cents.
She still claims to be of Cherokee descent. You’re inflating her ‘claims’ to almost criminal status. I’m not seeing where she’s stating that she’s NOT of Cherokee descent.
My support for Elizabeth Warren never had anything at all to do with her being a woman, but then I didn’t support Hillary because she’s a woman either. IMO supporting a candidate because she’s a woman is as ridiculous as supporting Obama because he’s black or Romney because he’s a white man, or Barney Frank because he’s gay, and I’m not sure why you even raise her gender. I support a candidate because I find reason to believe he or she, among the candidates, will best serve and represent the interests of the people. In all the years I’ve been voting I have yet to find a candidate without flaws. I believe we need someone in the Senate with Elizabeth Warren’s smarts and understanding of and point of view about the economy and the financial industry. And if the one fighting the good fight gamed the system once, yes in a relatively minor way, well I don’t like it but I’m not going to let the opposition use it to trick me into supporting someone who’s not nearly as competent as she is.
I don’t like the way she’s handled the “scandal” but I do like that her response seems authentic as opposed to manufactured by PR people and handlers. Like Clinton’s Monica scandal, nothing about any of this bruhaha changes the reasons I supported her; we need her in the Senate and I continue to support her.
What’s the issue, Jay, the percent of her heritage that’s Native American, right? The whole notion of half this or quarter that or one-sixteenth whatever is utterly ridiculous anyway.
I agree that Warren’s infraction is minor, and that her campaign completely mishandled the affair. But, practically speaking, her credibility may be irrecoverably undermined. A measure of our shallow politics, for sure, but a reality nonetheless. If she remains the Dem nominee, Brown will be re-elected for sure.
I find the matter neither silly nor little, as I will be elaborating over at TLN this weekend. What I first read as a poor response to a minor charge has turned into IMO) a serious character flaw that’s soured me on a candidate I previously supported. I’m sure a lot of former Edwards supporters can empathize.
Warren is as much indian as obama is Irish. Claiming to be Cherokee based on one distant ancestor would be simply tacky, had Warren not made the claim a prominent feature of her professional career.
Read what I have to say, and if y’all still think it’s just a peccadillo, then that’s there is to it.
nB: In her bio, DeFranco prominently & proudly mentions that her grandfather came from Sicily.
Tam, Americans typically identify with certain elements of our heritage and that often has to do with how we feel, and our family and other influences on us, more than what percentage we can claim of whatever. Elizabeth Warren’s response, to my ears, sounds grounded in that rather than being a deceitful, or campaign PR, response; and although I recognize how weird that is I respect it because I think it reflects a uniquely American experience.
Many of us have lots of different “blood” in us and we choose what feels right or seems will benefit us in some way. I’m English and Dutch Quaker (come to New Amsterdam in the 17th Century) and Polish Jew, both on my mother’s side, and French Catholic on my father’s. I have always, personally and if it comes up with a stranger, identified as Quaker even though I have as much Jew and a greater percentage of Catholic in my “blood” as Quaker. I always have identified as birthright Quaker because I knew that faction of my family best, was raised with Quaker sensibilities and I relate best to them in many daily ways. It’s all about feeling, not numbers and percentage. Although I’ve been to houses of worship and know about the religions of my family, I’ve never formally practiced any religion but when asked religion (back in the days when forms were allowed to ask that, I’m not sure they do anymore), I wrote in Birthright Quaker and believed that an honest and truthful response even though I’m one-quarter Quaker as opposed to one-half Catholic and, myself, practice no religion. But it gets more complicated because the single person I was closest to, growing up, was my Polish Jewish maternal grandmother who (with her Holocaust survivor friends) made sure I learned about my identify as Polish Jew, the Law of Return, and how that part of my family was (except for Grandmother and her brother) wiped out during WWII, and without hesitation I accept that identity when Grandmother’s friends (who, along with their children and grandchildren, long ago became my friends) attach it to me. Would my adversaries make an issue of that, am I Birthright Quaker or Law of Return Jew, or because the percentage of Catholic is greater am I Catholic? Or do I have no right to identify with any of that because I’ve chosen not to practice religion? That’s the kind of mish-mash of identities a lot of Americans have in terms of race and religion and nationality, and how we identify has more to do with how we feel about one element or another of our family history than actual percentages outsiders can dig up; we make choices that, over the years, solidify in our own minds as “true,” when in truth whichever elements we choose as identifier is no more or less true than another choice. That kind of uniquely American weirdness is how Elizabeth Warren’s choices and response sound to me, and I see no way it diminishes her potential competence as elected Senator.
“Identity is not inherent. It is shaped by circumstance and sensitivity and resistance to self-pity.” ― Dorothy West, The Wedding
I liked Ross Douthat’s take on the increasingly ridiculous fractionalization for “diversity” when we’ll all be as intermarried as Brazilians soon enough. http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/20/opinion/sunday/douthat-a-little-bit-indian.html
As one atheist T-shirt points out, “we’re all Africans.”
I’ll say it again: This race was the wrong one for Warren. She stood have waited and run for Gov. The Senate seems like it would be a waste of her skills. Unless she intends to go further, like Hillary did. Jaw boning with 99 bozos for incremental change…waste. Whereas she as Gov. she has a chance to be the counter point to Christie. Warren “gets it” in an expansive way – why would she want to hang out in the senate voting on bullshit 90% of the time?
At any rate, the entire affair is distasteful to me. If I was in Mass I’d still vote for her in the general no doubt, but I loath the diversity fetish on the left. That she may have benefited by checking a box bothers me. I’ve really come to hate this nonsense that elevates DNA over character. But I’d forgive it with her in an election. It’s her handling of it that is more upsetting. She’s bumbled this badly. I really hate that. For her mostly. The last month will haunt her forever whatever she ends up doing. That said- she can recover. She’s lucky she’s in a very blue state.
I’ve said it before. If the MA Democratic Party gives DeFranco enough delegates this weekend so that she and Warren face each other in a primary, and Warren wins then I might vote for her if she shows she can handle herself competing with DeFranco.. Remember that Warren has never even run for dogcatcher before. But if the Democrats don’t give the people of MA a chance to say, “We want a Democrat to represent us, but Ms. Warren’s Cherokee debacle disqualifies her,” then I’m voting for Scott Brown. Whether what Elizabeth Warren has done is trivial should be up to the people of MA. Personally, I think she gamed the system and didn’t ever expect to get caught. Which is arrogant.
As far as running for governor goes, she might have started with Mayor of Cambridge or maybe even dogcatcher. This woman has absolutely no experience getting elected to anything and it shows.
1) I agree that she is a better fit for an administrative position like governor;
2) What makes you think her opposition would not have dug up the Cherokee B.S. during her gubernatorial campaign?
3) As Axelrod’s beta version of obama, Deval Patrick is completely plugged into The Machine. He’s as dumb as a box of rocks, but what makes you think he’s leaving the Governor’s mansion anytime soon?
4) My hunch is with NES — Warren is dead meat;
5) I support Elliesmom’s position — if the power brokers lock out DeFranco this weekend, then the Dem Party doesn’t deserve her vote. If she feels the manipulation is so egregious as to merit casting a vote for Brown, I might not (were I still living there) join her, but I can’t chide her.
To quote JL Picard, “The line must be drawn somewhere … and I draw it HERE!”
The thing is that politically Scott Brown is probably a better match for me. He’s a moderate Republican and hasn’t cast any votes that particularly upset me. If the “Rcckefeller Republicans” still existed today, that’s probably where I’d be. But they appear to have met the same fate as the dinosaur. Both Warren and DeFranco are much more liberal than I am. However, MA is woefully under-represented by women. Only one woman in our congressional delegation. We have never sent a woman to the senate, and only one woman has ever been governor, and she was not elected to the position. In today’s political climate, one more liberal voice in the senate will move the votes closer to where I would like them to be so I am willing to cast my vote for a far-lefty if she pees sitting down. But we don’t need any more liars in DC..
MA is liberal, but it’s not Berkeley, a mistaken assumption national Dems too often make. Registered independents are a plurality in MA. Maybe that’s why they thought it was safe to send Axelrod of Evil there to stump — they envision the Mass Turnpike as one, giant Shattuck Ave.
Seems Elliesmom’s sentiments are widespread. From today’s Herald:
“You want our vote in November. You want our dollars now. OK. One condition — you open the Convention to all comers. … We represent some 10 voting age family members. … Smoke filled, backroom deals went out in the 60s — bring it back — and we will all vote Republican for the first time in our lives.”