"Warren’s new statement came after the Globe asked her campaign about documents it obtained Wednesday from Harvard’s library....
--more--"
At least the Globe gives good campaign advice.
Also see: Warren's Whoppers
Related: Governor Patrick endorses Elizabeth Warren
Who cares?
"Warren camp seeks to ease concerns over ancestry questions" by Stephanie Ebbert | Globe Staff, June 01, 2012
A day after Elizabeth Warren acknowledged that she told two Ivy League schools she was Native American, her campaign began scrambling to allay the concerns of supporters about her handling of the issue, while political observers questioned why she’d let the incendiary issue smolder for so long.
As the candidates squabbled, a handful of Democratic party leaders spoke of growing concerns within the ranks that the issue could shake Warren’s strong support less than 48 hours before Saturday’s Massachusetts Democratic nominating convention in Springfield - an event that the party has seen as a highlight of the election season for Warren.
The constant drumbeat of questioning and growing skepticism of the political press corps has haunted Warren for more than a month, since it was first reported that Harvard touted her as Native American in comments to its student newspaper.
I'm so glad the AmeriKan media is focused on the important issues like a laser.
Forget the imploding economy and never-ending wars for empire. This is important. It's Liz Warren's birther moment.
Political observers said Thursday that the Warren campaign seemed to be ducking the topic in the hopes that it would go away - flouting the campaign tradition of quickly addressing a difficult issue to contain it.
“Politics 101: On issues that are potentially unfavorable, put all the information out, take the one-time hit, and move on,’’ said Darrell M. West, vice president and director of Governance Studies at the Brookings Institution, the nonpartisan Washington think tank. “That makes it a one-day story. The worst-case scenario is the story lingering for weeks and weeks, because it just creates doubts about the candidate.’’
National Democratic strategists offered similarly unvarnished assessments.
“The whole concept of damage control is limiting the duration that you’re dealing with a story,’’ said veteran strategist Chris Lehane, former aide to Vice President Al Gore. “This strikes me as an issue that the campaign may have known a little bit about but didn’t have their arms completely around. Instead they had to deal with a whole series of revelations.’’
A senior staffer on the campaign, meanwhile, said the Warren team was not even aware that she’d been listed as Native American in any official capacity before the news broke last month, because researchers hired to scrub their own candidate’s background for biographical details that might erupt had failed to unearth that the law professor began identifying herself as a Native American about 25 years ago.
Warren’s campaign adviser, Doug Rubin, maintained that the campaign took the issue seriously from the start, but that it took time for aides to gather all the facts necessary to answer questions “honestly and accurately.’’
************************************
Warren’s team was caught flat-footed by the assertions first raised in the Boston Herald on April 27 that Harvard described her as a minority years ago. The candidate said she only learned of the claim when she read it in the newspaper.
Oh, Murdoch's paper. And the Globe has also run with it.
Two days later, it emerged that Warren had listed herself as a minority in directories of law school professors. She later maintained that she did not do so for hiring purposes, but to connect with “people like me.’’
Days of fumbling turned into weeks, finally leading to Warren’s revelation Wednesday night to the Globe that she had personally reported herself as a Native American to the Ivy League law schools where she worked, the University of Pennsylvania and Harvard University.
The Democratic strategists who thought that the Warren campaign bungled the issue attributed the mishandling in part to the fact that she is an untested candidate.
“One of the benefits of having run for office multiple times is [that] you are no longer a pristine white sheet,’’ said Lehane. “There is already mud attached to you.’’
The most important strategy going forward, the strategists said, is to prevent any further surprises.
“If there is anything else that isn’t public knowledge, it needs to be all out there in the next 48 hours. If there are more headlines and new aspects to this story over the summer, then it never goes away,’’ said Dan Schnur, director of the Jesse M. Unruh Institute of Politics at the University of Southern California, who worked on John McCain’s 2000 presidential bid.
Schnur contrasted the Warren controversy with the handling of a story during McCain’s 2000 presidential run , when the Globe reported that the Arizona Senator - who had denounced special-interest money - had written letters to the Federal Communications Commission on behalf of a communication company that helped him raise campaign money and let him use its corporate jet.
The McCain campaign responded four days later by releasing about 500 letters McCain had written as chairman of the Senate Commerce Committee since 1997. Not only that, Schnur said, the campaign “picked out the letters that had referenced contributors’’ and tried to demonstrate there was no quid pro quo. Though the Globe still raised issues about the timing of some of the fundraising, Schnur said, the controversy was confined to “one difficult story.’’
Warren, by contrast, has faced a month’s worth of difficult press.
It's called framing the campaign for the public.
Still, some Democrats argue that the Harvard professor has not been hurt by her campaign’s delay in addressing the issue head-on. Recent polls show that Warren has not lost ground with voters since the controversy took root. In fact, Brown’s lead has narrowed in recent months.
Yeah, the media piling on has helped her -- as it should.
“This is a hothouse media story that by every indication from the polls has had absolutely zero impact on the race,’’ said veteran Democratic strategist Bob Shrum.
Yup, that's the AmeriKan media I know and love!
But West said Democrats shouldn’t take too much comfort in recent poll results. “They’re taking a short-term perspective on what is a long-term problem,’’ he said. “Any issue that is controversial undermines people’s impressions of the individual. It may take awhile to move the vote needle, but it happens. And the longer it’s in the news, the more likely it will affect the vote.’’
Translation: THIS SOB ELECTION ALREADY BEEN RIGGED for BROWN -- and I'll bet John King of CNN will have the narrative maps to prove it!
--more--"
"Elizabeth Warren on Scott Brown’s heels in Globe poll; Challenger trails by 2 points despite heritage questions" by Noah Bierman | Globe Staff, June 02, 2012
Despite a five-week drubbing over her claims to Native American heritage, Democratic Senate candidate Elizabeth Warren remains neck and neck with US Senator Scott Brown, a Republican, as she heads into Saturday’s state party convention, a new Globe poll shows.
But there are signs that the controversy has wounded the first-time candidate, whose entrance into the race came with a star power that galvanized Democrats and catapulted the contest into one of the most closely watched in the nation.
The vast majority of voters (72 percent) said the issue would not affect their vote, but 31 percent of self-described independents - a critical voting bloc - said the issue makes them less likely to support Warren in November.
The narrative already taking shape.
The Harvard professor’s popularity has also risen one percentage point, to 48 percent, since the Globe polled in March, but the percentage of detractors has climbed more precipitously, by nine points to 32 percent.
The poll shows Brown in a strong position. The incumbent’s job approval rating is at a comfortable 60 percent, with just 31 percent of voters saying they disapprove of the work he is doing in Washington.
Still, the bottom line is that the race remains a toss-up, with Brown leading Warren 39 percent to 37 percent, largely unchanged from the Globe’s March poll that also showed Brown leading by two percentage points.
“Overall, this shows the strengths that Brown has and it shows the problems, obviously, that the Warren campaign has had,’’ said Andrew E. Smith, the Globe’s pollster.
But, with the race virtually tied and demographics that favor Democratic candidates in Massachusetts, “this will be a really close race all the way through,’’ said Smith, director of the University of New Hampshire Survey Center....
The likely voters responded during a period of intense media coverage of questions over whether Warren used unverified claims of Native American ancestry to advance her academic career.
The controversy, which has dragged on for five weeks, has been the most difficult challenge for Warren, a first-time candidate who has at times given awkward and inconsistent answers on the subject.
Political insiders have been speculating fiercely over the level of damage the issue has caused Warren, who is considered one of the few capable of picking up a US Senate seat for her party in an otherwise difficult year for Democrats.
The state party holds its annual convention Saturday in Springfield.
Warren’s sole rival for the nomination, Marisa DeFranco, was unknown by 77 percent of voters in the poll, and it is uncertain whether she will attract the 15 percent support from state Democratic Party delegates to secure a spot on the Sept. 6 primary ballot.
The evidence of the impact of the Native American heritage issue on the campaign is similar to that in a Suffolk University poll released last week, showing the vast majority of voters did not feel it was a significant story.
I am Massachusetts, dear readers!!
Voters in the Globe poll seemed well aware of the issue, with 37 percent indicating they were very familiar and 33 percent saying they were somewhat familiar with it. But even among those who indicated they are paying at least some attention, 72 percent said it would not impact their vote in November.
“I wish it were about issues and we could understand the candidates more fully,’’ said Will Case, a 67-year-old retired marina manager from Orleans, and a poll respondent who said he typically votes Republican and probably will support Brown.
But that does not guarantee the controversy will end for Warren.
Not with the media flogging the s*** out of it.
Voters appeared divided over whether she has satisfactorily explained her assertion of Native American identity, with 42 percent saying she had not adequately explained it and 37 percent saying she had.
The potential impact, and limits, of the issue are evident in voters such as Jared Bettencourt, a 31-year-old union carpenter from Plymouth and a registered Democrat.
Bettencourt says he knows a little about the controversy, but is interested in learning more.
“It would be nice to know more about that because it kind of tells you what kind of person she really is,’’ said Bettencourt, who responded to the poll.
But either way, he is voting for Warren, he said, because of an overall dislike of Republicans.
The poll results among self-identified independents, whose votes Brown needs to win overwhelmingly in a state that traditionally favors Democrats, are particularly helpful to Brown. Fifty-seven percent of independents in the Globe survey said Warren had not fully explained the issue.
The Native American controversy has eclipsed the negative attention Brown has received from Warren supporters.
I think that is the point of the agenda-pushing coverage because Brownie is in AIPAC's pocket and is backed by the big pocket$ of Wall Street.
Only 19 percent of voters said they were very familiar with stories about Brown’s fund-raising from Wall Street interests, with 37 percent saying they were somewhat familiar.
And among those who were at least somewhat familiar, 66 percent said it would not affect their vote.
Yeah, Massachusetts voters don't care about Wall Street buying off their political process.
If this is true, then fuck 'em! The American people deserve what they get then.
Brown also did well on a question that has, historically, often accurately forecast election winners.
There you go!
Voters, when asked who they think will win the race, regardless of their preference, chose Brown by a margin of 52 percent to 27 percent.
It's over.
Smith said that question is often a valuable predictor, especially farther away from an election, because it takes into account what poll respondents’ friends, relatives, and co-workers are saying about the candidates.
Laurie Petrie, a 60-year-old Chicopee Democrat who is unemployed, illustrates that point. She said she would be voting for Warren, but “I think a lot of people like Scott Brown; I wouldn’t be terribly upset if he beat her.’’
With that kind of support Warren is sunk.
The poll reinforces Brown’s popularity, though both candidates remain well liked. When asked who is more likeble, 52 percent said Brown, while 26 percent said Warren.
Despite the apparent success Brown is having in projecting his message, he must still confront the difficulty of facing a well-financed and popular Democrat in a presidential year. President Obama, who will lead the Democratic ticket, remained ahead of Mitt Romney in the state, 46 percent to 34 percent, in the poll. The 12-point margin is smaller than the 16-point margin recorded in the March poll, but still strong.
--more--"
"At convention, Warren aims to allay doubt, revive fervor" by Frank Phillips | Globe Staff, June 02, 2012
Delegate Jean Palmer, a librarian from Lincoln, disputes the notion little-known North Shore immigration lawyer Marisa DeFranco can’t win the primary or the general election, despite the fact she has a vastly underfunded campaign and has made little headway in gaining voter visibility over the last several months.
“A lot of people out here are disillusioned with the establishment and Marisa is going up against the establishment,’’ Palmer said....
Be they a D, R, or I.
The convention comes as Warren struggles to quell the political and media uproar over her assertions of Native American heritage in a legal directory and during her tenure as a law professor at the University of Pennsylvania and Harvard Law School. After weeks of muddled statements and apparent contradictions, Warren said Wednesday night that she had personally reported herself as a Native American to the schools.
With no proof?
A new Boston Globe poll shows that a large majority of voters said the issue would have no impact on their decision about which candidate to support.
Then WHY AM I SEEING SO MUCH ABOUT IT?
Still, Brown and the Republicans have shown no signs of letting up.
Oh, that's why.
On Friday, the state GOP released a new video, dubbed “Deceitful,’’ that reviews the Native American controversy and asks delegates, “Is this really who you want representing you?’’
A day ahead of the convention, Warren fought to redirect the conversation.
The whistle-stop tour from Boston to Springfield, and the upbeat visuals that accompanied it - Warren in red, smiling with her supporters, banners waving - was designed to shift the focus from the drumbeat of controversy, toward the soaring rhetoric that helped propel her into the national spotlight when she launched her Senate bid last fall.
But as Warren stepped off the train in Springfield, it was clear the Native American issue has not been put to rest.
Reporters bombarded her with the latest round of questions about why she has failed to give consistent answers and whether she would address the topic on Saturday.
Once again, Warren was on the defense....
--more--"
So how was that convention?
"House representatives pay tribute to Frank, Olver
As the convention festivities kicked off Saturday morning, members of the state’s US House delegation gave remarks in tribute to their colleagues and fellow Democrats, Barney Frank and John Olver, two retiring congressmen.
Olver is my guy and they just dedicated a bus station to him -- even though the buses will stop coming soon.
As for Barney Frank, he was in the pocket of banks and Liberty Mutual.
“They stood up every day for men and women in the Commonwealth who wanted the opportunity to succeed,’’ said Representative William Keating, a Bourne Democrat.
Representative James P. McGovern of Worcester called Frank “a Democrat who strikes terror in the hearts of Republicans’’ and alluded to the time the two men were arrested protesting the genocide in Sudan, joking that Frank was a lot of fun in jail.
When are you guys going to protest genocide in Palestine?
Oh, right, you make that possible with the Israeli aid packages that whiz through Congress.
In his tribute, Representative Edward J. Markey, the dean of the delegation, said, “When they build a Mount Rushmore for liberals, Barney Frank will be up there.’’
Olver gave a short speech, but Frank was not on stage. Also missing was Steve Lynch, the South Boston congressman who is the state’s most conservative Democrat.
Anyone else?
"Patrick rallies thousands of Democrats with speech
Governor Deval Patrick gave the most fiery speech of the day at the state Democratic convention, far more nationally oriented than those by other speakers, praising President Obama and criticizing Republicans as unprincipled bullies, seeking power rather than principle. “I for one will not let him be bullied out of office,’’ Patrick said. “I’m in for 2012; are you in?’’
Pfffft!
--more--"
Also see: Massachusetts governor’s race looms in background
Warren trounces rival, girds for nasty campaign
Let it begin:
"Warren has had a well-documented rough month, what with all those stories about how proud she is of her undocumented Native American heritage, and whether it has ever helped her get a job. Last week she revealed a new detail, that her parents were forced to elope because of her mother’s Native American blood. She apparently never thought to mention this until Wednesday.
Warren has told so many stories, and had so many belated recollections, that it makes your head spin....
That's what the Globe does to mine.
--more--"
"Boston’s ministers skeptical of Elizabeth Warren; Black leaders want candidate meetings" by Stephanie Ebbert | Globe Staff, June 04, 2012
Dogged by weeks of questions about whether her claims of Native American heritage helped advance her career, Elizabeth Warren now faces skepticism from some of Boston’s black ministers whose appearance with Scott Brown just after his 2010 election to US Senate helped shape Brown’s image as a different breed of Republican.
“It will take more than an impromptu endorsement by Governor Patrick to make an intellectually compelling case why Elizabeth Warren deserves to be the next senator,” said the Rev. Eugene F. Rivers III, referring to the state’s governor, Deval Patrick, who is black. Rivers said he will ask Warren and Brown to meet with the black community to address its concerns. “The support she receives should be earned.”
I'm just wondering how many fraudulent foreclosures by the banks backing Brownie hit his congregation.
The pressure comes at a difficult time for Warren, a white
Harvard Law bankruptcy professor who has spent five weeks deflecting
criticism for identifying herself as having Native American heritage.
As a result, a hot-button issue of past decades — affirmative action — has taken center stage in a recession-era campaign that Warren had hoped to focus on defending the middle class.
Yeah, let's decide the election on ANYTHING BUT the IMPORTANT ISSUES NOW!
“There’s a back-to-the future element in terms of the substance of the issue,” said Democratic consultant Chris Lehane. “You do suddenly feel like you’re back in the 1980s having a debate about something that people have long ago moved past.”
You know, I wish I was! I'd be a lot younger and healthier.
And THANKS, AmeriKan media! Thanks for taking us back to the future, you pos.
Warren’s Democratic defenders suggest that the persistent line of questioning on diversity hiring is being used by Republicans to inflame voter anger, in a manner that’s tantamount to “race-baiting,” as veteran Democratic strategist Bob Shrum told Politico.
“It’s clear that Scott Brown is trying to go after white, working-class Reagan Democrats, playing divide-and-conquer politics,” said Massachusetts Democratic strategist Mary Anne Marsh. “In tough economic times, when people are out of work and looking for jobs, that’s the kind of politics Republicans play.”
But Rivers said the questions are legitimate and could affect Warren’s image in the black community and the public at large.
“It is within bounds to raise the question of whether or not a white woman used the minority card for her professional advantage,” said Rivers.
What, you jealous?
“Ancestry is not the issue,” Rivers added, saying that Warren’s handling of the controversy raises questions beyond her heritage. “Did you tell the truth? Because you marketed yourself as the good-guy, straight-shooting-populist, representing-poor-people candidate.”
With all the lies we are awash in this is what he is worried about?
Btw, that guy you stood with represented himself in the same way.
“Affirmative action — that issue becomes important because it points to who you are,” added the Rev. Jeffrey Brown, executive director of the TenPoint Coalition, who pointed to an assertion that she is 1/32 Cherokee. “I’m thinking to myself, if I was 1/32 white, or of European descent, would I be able to put on an application that I was white? And if you look at a picture of me, you see what I’m talking about. The question is not a trivial one, or one that can just be dismissed as a Republican tactic. And I say this as someone who campaigned for Martha Coakley and I’m independent in terms of my political status.”
Five weeks ago Warren dismissed a Boston Herald report that she had been touted as a minority professor by Harvard Law School, saying that was the first she had learned of the identification. It soon emerged that she had been self-identifying in professional directories as a minority, citing her family’s belief that some of their ancestors were Native American. Then on Wednesday, she acknowledged to the Globe that she had declared herself Native American to Harvard and the University of Pennsylvania.
Polls have shown that Warren’s support has not been dampened by the issue; she and Brown are running neck and neck. But many have questioned her campaign’s handling of the sensitive issue, and opponents have hammered her on her explanations. On Friday, the Massachusetts Republican Party released a web ad called “deceitful,” using news clips of the emerging story to cast doubt on her claims.
Republican analyst Todd Domke said that the issue could tarnish the features that made Warren such an attractive candidate....
The controversy also gains steam because it involves Harvard — an elite institution that represents the intellectual capital of the country and, to conservatives, the center of liberal idealism....
--more--"
Apparently Brown's lies don't bother the ministers:
"Senator Brown sought to loosen bank rules; OK’d overhaul, then called for leeway, e-mails show" by Noah Bierman and Michael Levenson | Globe Staff, June 04, 2012
Senator Scott Brown has trumpeted his role in casting the deciding vote in favor of the 2010 Wall Street overhaul, but records show that after he voted for the law, he worked to shield banks and other financial institutions from some of its tough provisions.
But he's one of you, Bay State voter!
E-mails between Brown’s legislative director and US Treasury Department officials show that Brown advocated for a loose interpretation of the law so that banks could more easily engage in high-risk investments.
You know, the kind that cost JPMorgan who knows how many billions.
While the law, known as Dodd-Frank, sets broad parameters for how
the financial industry must behave, the interpretation of the law, and
the rules that follow, will govern Wall Street’s daily business.
It's been OVER TWO YEARS and they STILL HAVEN'T WRITTEN the RULES?
At issue in Brown’s e-mails is the Volcker rule, a particularly contentious provision of Dodd-Frank. The rule, championed by Paul Volcker, a former chairman of the Federal Reserve, prevents commercial banks from speculating heavily in higher risk investments. Banks are federally insured, which means that if they fail, taxpayers must reimburse many depositors....
Yeah, Brownie lookin' out fer us!!!
--more--"
"And with that, Elizabeth Warren was gone."
Or soon will be.
Related: McGrory Makes Me Laugh About Liberty Mutual Looting
I didn't find anything funny in the last one.
Yeah, she can't win either way.
Also see: Senate teams clash over a schedule for debates
Senator Brown casts vote against wage bill
