Tag Archives: Elizabeth Warren

Elizabeth Warren’s Plan to Bamboozle American Voters, by MN Gordon

Beware politicians bearing plans. From MN Gordon at economicprism.com:

The run-up to the presidential primaries offers a funhouse reflection of American life.  Presidential hopefuls, hacks, and has-beens turn to focus groups to discover what they think the American electorate wants.  Then they distill it down to hollow bumper stickers.  After that, they pump their fists and reflect it back with mindless repetition.

Change We Can Believe In.  Feel the Bern.  Make America Great Again.  Sí Se Puede.  Fighting for Us.  Compassionate Conservatism.  A Stronger America.  Ross for Boss.  Morning in America.  Not Just Peanuts.  Nixon’s the One.  Dean Scream.  And much, much, more…

The mantras are both idiotic and comical.  They provide political lemmings with something to believe in.  They also provide incisive observers with a unique prism into the menaces of tomorrow.

For example, presidential candidate Elizabeth Warren’s slogan is: “Warren Has a Plan for That.”  An official t-shirt, adorned with this slogan, will set you back just $30 bucks.  And you can pick up a slogan emblazoned tote bag for $35.  What a bargain!

To any onlooker with their wits about them this mantra is utterly absurd.  But to Warren, it’s as serious as a heart attack.  She does, indeed, have a plan for everything – even if it means instant death.  In fact, her official website includes the following sales copy:

“Child care unaffordable?  Big corporations and billionaires not paying their fair share?  Want more economic and political power in the hands of the people?  Don’t worry, Warren has a plan for that.”

Continue reading


When Warren Woke Up to A World Without Her, by Tom Luongo

This article is worth it just for the new Elizabeth Warren nicknames. From Tom Luongo at tomluongo.me:

Elizabeth Warren’s national political career is over.  And malignant narcissist that she is she keeps trying to score rhetorical points against Donald Trump, thinking if she can just get in a good one, she’ll stop being a laughing stock.

But, that’s not going to happen.  She’s accumulating nicknames now at a rate that is faster than black men are leaving the Democrats.



Last of the Fauxhicans



Continue reading

Atlas Shrugged, er, Mugged, by Jeffrey Harding

Elizabeth Warren could be one of the villains in Atlas Shrugged. From Jeffrey Harding at anindependentmind.com:

Current events have revealed that Ayn Rand’s novel Atlas Shrugged is not just fiction, but almost a prophesy. Elizabeth Warren’s Accountable Capitalism Act and the cronyism of Trump’s tariff policies are straight out of Rand’s novel. It won’t end well.

Ayn Rand’s novel Atlas Shrugged depicts a world where freedom and free markets are crushed by not-so-well-meaning politicians and bureaucrats. The story is a blueprint for the creation of a command economy where prices, wages, and production are dictated by bureaucratic apparatchiks. Like all regimes seeking autocratic power, the outcome, as she chillingly reveals, is cronyism, corruption, economic depression, and the rise of dictatorship.

Continue reading

Elizabeth Warren tells slain Mollie Tibbets’ family that we need to focus on ‘real problems’ like reuniting immigrant families, after the student was murdered by a man allegedly in the US illegally, by The Daily Mail

Some fine examples of liberal “compassion.” From The Daily Mail at dailymail.co.uk:

  • Massachusetts senator was asked if Tibbetts’ death meant tougher laws needed
  • Gave condolences to family but quickly shifted conversation to attack on Trump
  • Said USA needed to focus on ‘real problems’ like fallout from separation policy 
  • Donald Trump Junior accused the Democrat of not caring for ‘actual Americans’
  • Cristhian Rivera, 24, was arrested on Monday and charged with Tibbett’s murder
  • On Wednesday Rivera’s attorney claimed he was in the country LEGALLY

Elizabeth Warren was criticized on Wednesday for dodging a question about the murder of Mollie Tibbetts by shifting the conversation to the need to reunite immigrant families.

The Massachusetts senator was speaking on CNN at just after 8.20am (ET) when she was asked whether the Iowa student’s murder allegedly at the hands of an undocumented migrant meant tougher immigration laws were needed.

Warren began by offering condolences to Tibbetts’ family but then spoke of the need to focus on ‘real problems’ such as the fallout from the Trump administration’s policy of detaining migrant children away from their parents on the US-Mexico border.

Asked on Wednesday whether Mollie Tibbetts' murder allegedly at the hands of an undocumented migrant meant the US needed tougher immigration laws, Warren quickly shifted the conversation to criticizing the Trump administration

Asked on Wednesday whether Mollie Tibbetts’ murder allegedly at the hands of an undocumented migrant meant the US needed tougher immigration laws, Warren quickly shifted the conversation to criticizing the Trump administration

‘I’m so sorry for the family and I know this is hard not only for her family but also for the local community and people throughout Iowa,’ the Democrat said on Wednesday, a day after Tibbetts’ body was found after a five week search.

‘But one of the things we have to remember is we need an immigration system that is effective and focuses on where real problems are.’

She then described her visit last month to the Mexican border to speak to children and mothers who had been separated. ‘I met with those mothers who had been lied to and didn’t know where their children were… and there was no plan about how they would be reunified with their children.

‘I think we need immigration laws that focus on people who pose a real threat and I don’t think mamas and babies are where we should be focusing our resources.’

To continue reading: Elizabeth Warren tells slain Mollie Tibbets’ family that we need to focus on ‘real problems’ like reuniting immigrant families, after the student was murdered by a man allegedly in the US illegally

Elizabeth Warren’s Pocahontas Pickle, by David Cantanese

Nobody puts a nickname on political opponents to more devastating effect than President Trump. “Pocahontas” may well dog Elizabeth Warren for the rest of her career. From David Cantanese at usnews.com:

If she decides to challenge President Trump in 2020, Warren will have to relitigate a controversy that first ignited in 2012.

Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., makes the rounds for television news interviews in the Russell Rotunda on Wednesday, Feb. 8, 2017. (Bill Clark/CQ Roll Call)

The president first deemed Sen. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts “Pocahontas” in May of 2016. (Bill Clark/CQ Roll Call)

When President Donald Trump casually invoked “Pocahontas” during a ceremony honoring Native Americans on Monday, Washington’s political class swiftly went into its familiar and usually unfulfilling ritual of trying to decipher his deeper intentions.

Was he attempting to purposefully distract media coverage away from the White House’s skirmish with the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau? Was he simply reaching for cheap levity among a group he was largely unfamiliar with?Or did he view it as an irresistible opportunity to strike at a reoccurring political nemesis who he views as a gathering threat to his re-election prospects in 2020?

The president first deemed Sen. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts “Pocahontas” in May of 2016. After Trump had become the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, Warren began coming at him hard on Twitter, vowing to battle his “toxic stew of hatred & insecurity.”

Never allowing an attack to go unanswered, Trump responded in kind on his favorite social media platform, blasting her “phony Native American heritage.”

When The New York Times columnist Maureen Dowd phoned Trump to ask him if Republicans were chafing at his Twitter-feud with Warren at a time he should be presenting a unifying posture, he replied, “You mean Pocahontas?,” thus producing another memorable caricature.

Trump’s reignition of the racially-charged slight reinforced his complete disregard for politically correct boundaries. It illustrated his affinity for branding his opponents with pithy nicknames in order to degrade their stature. But it also reopened a controversy for Warren that even some Democrats say she mishandled during her 2012 campaign.

And if she runs for the White House in 2020, the “Pocahontas” problem won’t go away. She’ll need a pithier, clear-throated response to those hearing the details for the first time and a way to turn the tables on Trump.

 To continue reading: Elizabeth Warren’s Pocahontas Pickle

The Shining Twins Grow Up, from the Lonely Libertarian

via The Burning Platform


Biden and Warren: The Democratic Ticket in 2016? by Robert Gore

Picture from The New York Times

Here’s an interesting speculation; reader comments welcome. What if the Democratic party comes to realize that Hillary Clinton is an albatross? Polls indicate that Bernie Sanders would do better against Donald Trump. If he is not the nominee, a few of his supporters will switch to Trump or Clinton, but many of them will stay home. Clinton, SLL recently argued, is a perfect set up for Trump’s unpredictability and personal attacks. She lacks natural political skills and is vulnerable on both issues and scandals. She is establishment and an ardent foreign interventionist. Trump made mince meat of a slew of establishment, ardent foreign interventionist Republicans. He’s narrowing the gap with her in national polls, and has caught up with her in key states Pennsylvania, Ohio, and Florida.

The email scandal hangs over Clinton’s head. The FBI has interviewed her close associates and will probably interview her. Bryan Pagliano, who designed her private email server, has received immunity from prosecution in return for his testimony. The cynical assumption, and still the betting favorite, is an FBI recommendation to seek an indictment against Clinton will be quashed by President Obama’s Justice Department. Even that outcome cannot be regarded as favorable for Clinton. Many will conclude that it’s the establishment taking care of its own, a key issue propelling both Trump’s and Sanders’ campaigns. There is also the strong possibility that someone in the FBI leaks damaging material that was the basis of the rejected recommendation, compounding the damage to Clinton.

For argument’s sake, assume Obama and the Democrat’s movers and shakers conclude that Hillary is a liability. Say they let the primaries play out and Clinton has a majority of delegates and committed super delegates. However, suppose a subtle message goes out to the FBI: the administration will follow whatever the FBI recommends and would not be overly upset if that was indictment. Were it to happen, Clinton would presumably have to abandon her candidacy.

Does that clear the way for Bernie Sanders? Not if the movers and shakers have their way. He is about as popular with them as Donald Trump is with his party’s establishment. Joseph Biden made a couple of interesting comments recently. He said he thought he would have been the best presidential candidate had he chosen to run, and he also said he and Elizabeth Warren discussed her as his running mate. Trial balloons? What if Clinton, upon announcing her withdrawal, released her delegates to vote for Joseph Biden and Elizabeth Warren, who had agreed, for the good of the party and the nation, to accept a last-minute draft?

The key is Obama. For him this would be the best possible outcome. His vice president is far more likely to preserve his tattered legacy than Clinton, who would want to carve out her own historical niche. Biden is not a polarizing figure, like Clinton, and does not have her scandalous baggage. His long string of goofy statements will be ignored by the press, as they always do for Democrats. He is a centrist Democrat and would champion mainstream Democratic policies. Having Warren on the ticket as his vice president would keep the gender-based vote on board. It would make her the automatic favorite for the Democratic nomination in 2020 (when Biden will be seventy-eight years old) or 2024. She’s very liberal and has been a strident critic of Wall Street and the banks, which will help with disgruntled Sanders supporters.

It might make the Democratic convention messier, it might take more than one ballot, and there would be those disgruntled Sanders supporters, but a Biden-Warren ticket stands a better chance against Donald Trump than Hillary Clinton. Sanders supporters would have three months to get over it. They are more ideologically aligned with the Democrats than the Republicans. Not to say that Biden and Warren aren’t establishment tools, but they haven’t been as blatant about it as Clinton, making them more palatable to the Sanders crowd.

Biden and Warren are much less vulnerable to Trump’s attacks than Clinton. Biden has been the vice president for eight years and was a senator for thirty-six, with stints as chairman of the Foreign Relations and Judiciary Committees. On paper he’s qualified. He has a genial personality and is a known, safe, quantity. Warren has made a name for herself and attracts substantial support from the party’s far left wing. Biden and Warren give the Democrats a much better chance of winning the election—with a coat tail effect for Democratic Congressional candidates—than Clinton. Were this scenario to play out, the election would have to be rated a toss-up and not, as SLL said in the recent article, “Trump’s to lose.”

There is one final consideration. Obama loathes the Clintons and the feeling is mutual. If Clinton is indicted, he will showcase the indictment as proof that his Justice Department does not politicize investigations. Hillary will be in a heap of expensive, lengthy, and risky legal trouble. Wouldn’t Obama relish the prospect of the Clintons groveling for a prospective pardon like Gerald Ford granted Richard Nixon? He would extract from Hillary a promise to release her delegates (and campaign contributors) to the Biden-Warren ticket and from both of them a promise to give it their heartfelt support. Assuming Obama held up his end of the bargain (not a safe assumption), he would issue the pardon after the election to minimize the political fallout. Democrats would be happy to put the matter behind them. Only Republicans would complain and for Obama, that’s the cherry on the sundae.

Something to think about.


TGP_photo 2 FB