So all you libbies proud of Warren pimping out Native Americans to get ahead?

Man, it is bad enough she is a dirty, no good 1%-er, but to learn she got ahead by like this. Plus it appears she has really pissed of the Natives.

Classic.

The latest news confirms that Ms. Warren meets the legal requirement for claiming Native American ancestry.

There are no provable claims that she abused her legal status. If there are lawyers posting in this thread - or even pretend lawyers - they know that compliance with the law is what counts.

To NOT avail yourself of any advantage would be foolish. If Ms. Warren made full use of any and all assistance, it speaks rather clearly to her ability to maximize her potential.

Isn't that great? She proposes to help the United States once again take advantage of its available resources to realize our potential.

Hey, Spanky -

Off topic, perhaps, but weren't you one of the people who was always harping on the Chrysler facility in Newark, DE being closed a while back? Thought you might appreciate an update on what's already happening at the site this week:

http://www.newarkpostonline.com/news/article_1df0c83e-92cf-11e1-9d17-001a4bcf887a.html

Now, I'm no expert, but those sound an awful lot like "green energy" jobs to me. 1500 of 'em. I'll be sure and let you know if I hear any of the good citizens of Newark complaining. About these jobs OR about Elizabeth Warren's ancestry.

I wouldn't single out any one person as you have suggested Amy. But I would suggest this:

In order for America to move forward with bipartisan efforts to help every American our elected officials need to put aside their party first mentality.

We have all seen what can happen when one party is elected as president and the other party controls Congress. It happened under Bush and it happened under Obama. Both to this point have had disastrous effects.

The only way to move toward true bipartisan politics would be if we had an even 50/50 split in the Senate and a 268/267 split in the House.

Although I doubt it would happen, the other thing I believe that would help everyone would be to have the VP be from the opposite party to the President.

If any of those things happened, only the best possible ideas across the board would be made into law. If they couldn't agree with a majority, so what. We have more than enough laws on the books at this point to effectively run this country to put us back on the right track of individual prosperity. All it would take would be to have our elected officials doing what they should have been doing all along; representing their constituents rather than their party.

Hey Spanks,

Since you are a member of the legal persuasion, perhaps you can answer this question: Why would a member of your profession voluntarily surrender their license in their state?

What can Brown do for you?

So far, not a damn thing!

Leftlib...,

You'll need to get rid of the fake filibuster also.

If you don't then your 50/50 Senate scenario won't work.

Wasn't Brown a tea party favorite not too long ago?

I'd say it sounds like some Romney flip-flop action from the Senator from Mass.

Must be something in the water up there.

"Standing with President Obama on the day he signed it into law was another one of those great experiences," Brown says in the ad. "

Is Brown endorsing Obama? Sure sounds like it.

Whatever else may separate us, we are Americans first. To me, that means we need to work together now."

Senator please send your check to the Obama Campaign now! Thanks for your support.

Obama/Biden 2012

leftliberalliars, you've attempted to make a case for fairness in congress, but why not begin with a majority vote rather than the super majority required for most votes in the senate? As it stands, it's the tail wagging the dog with the minority party calling the shots, though I doubt that was the original intent.

If there are lawyers posting in this thread - or even pretend lawyers - they know that compliance with the law is what counts.

The pretend lawyers out there are too busy fretting over rising falling gas prices and the impact to filling the RV, the boat, jet skis, and force-feeding 20 tacos down the throat of junior to consider compliance. Ah, I do miss the days when the faux lawyer begged folks on this blog for advice on handling the 'estate' of a 90 year-old widow. Seems the $250 an hour she paid him for newsvine advice was the best money could buy.

DW: The latest news confirms that Ms. Warren meets the legal requirement for claiming Native American ancestry.

Got a source for that? And even if she does meet the legal requirements, it would certainly be interesting to have her explain what oppression she has experienced by being a Native American. Maybe she can tell us all about her time spent on the reservation and the hardships she's experienced in her life brought on by of her ethnicity. Maybe she can explain the culture of her tribe?

Yeah, it's doubtful she knows anything about those things. Either way, the woman is a fraud.

Great point Tom. But as we can see, my idea is unfortunately a mute point.

Look at the responses here everyday to all of the articles that First Read prints. People only want to praise everything done by the party they like, with heaping doses of nasty comments about the party they don't like.

Far to many people across the country have bought into the idea that the democrats and republicans want us to believe: one party is better than the other. The simple fact is that each of the partys find this to be the easier road to travel. They don't want to have to prove that their candidate is better than the opponent they face in an election. They would rather we fight about their current platform rather than investigating which candidate would be best for our interests. What we end up with are career politicians that often times are looking out for their party interests instead of our best interests.

Either way, the woman is a fraud.

Well, it does take one to recognize one!

Then again, I am not totally convinced you're actually a women, most of them don't wear size 15 EEE shoes...

Come on Snuffy - now it's your turn to call me DumbFux a half dozen times!

Poor thing isn't capable of even slinging a decent insult anymore! lol

winemaker: "Why would a member of your profession voluntarily surrender their license in their state?"

Since I can't find any reference anywhere on line to Elizabeth Warren surrendering her law license (voluntarily or not) and since you didn't mention anyone in Spanky's state of California who did so, I'm gonna go out on a limb here and assume (correct me if I'm wrong) that you're referring to the oft-repeated and even more often debunked claim by assorted right wing forwarded e-mails over the last four years that either of the Obamas were somehow forced to do so. So let me explain it for you:

"Michelle Obama did not "voluntarily surrender" her law license; she voluntarily requested that her license be placed on "inactive status". The difference is crucial: a lawyer who has "surrendered" his law license has given it up and therefore no longer has a license; a lawyer who has gone on "inactive" status still holds a valid law license but is not currently engaged in any professional activities that require it to be active."

Doing so enables someone to not have to pay for things like malpractice insurance or continuing education classes when they are not actively practicing law.

Read all about it here:

http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/lawlicenses.asp

And when you're finished reading the truth on this one, try getting some fresh material. This one's almost as old as the birth certificate conspiracy.

P.S. to leftliberalliars: For about the nine millionth time, your idea is a "moot" point, not a "mute" one. If it was "mute", you'd never have expressed it aloud. And FYI, when you're compalining about "heaping doses of nasty comments about the party they don't like", people might tend to take you a bit more seriously if your screen name was something other than "leftliberalliars". Just a thought.....

Ursula: As it stands, it's the tail wagging the dog with the minority party calling the shots, though I doubt that was the original intent.

I would only buy into the majority having the final voice over a super majority IF it were a true 50/50 split. That would mean that elected officials voted across party lines and that is what I believe was the intent of our founding father's. What we now see in Congress is a corruption of our political process to benefit some, rather than the masses brought to us by each of the two major political partys.

"Moot"! For god's sake. the word is "Moot" not "Mute". Am I expected to take seriously pius suggestions on "how we can all agree on something" from a clown that calls himself "leftliberalliars"? I don't believe so.

The 'mute' point leftyleaningloftyliberallibellooneylonesomeloathsomelittlelaboriouslatentlamentinglunatic tried to make fell, quite frankly, on deaf ears. Moving on to the next moot point...

The far left and the far right are tearing this country apart.

I chose this name here because this site overwhelmingly sides with the far left. If this site stood to the far right as FOX does, I would have used the name rightconservativeliars.

Yes, I used the wrong spelling when I typed mute instead of moot. Two people have made a point to correct me. I'm human and I made a mistake. But that should not take away from my main point.

You have made my point Scott, regardless of your intent. You have shown that people will side with/against an idea simply because of an affiliation rather than basing their choices on the merit of the subject matter.

Smiff:

Knowing as I do that you squawking points regurgitators attack messengers, I'll just provide you with search parameters. Pick and choose your source: "Elizabeth Warren native American". I know, I know. It's so tough to think up those truly difficult parameters.

On your other worthless point, the degree of oppression is irrelevant to the issue at hand.

Got a source for the fraud charge with which you've attacked Ms. Warren, or is that just more of your vicious libel?

The latentloonlunger feigns bi-partisanship over a mute point. Tell us langolier, is this also a bi-partisan comment? I suspect faux-fainting is your better act.

That wasn't frozen yogurt. She puked when she started listening to what he had to say!

DW: Pick and choose your source

So you don't have a source.

It's just another lie from you. Not surprising, that's what you do.

DW: Got a source for the fraud charge with which you've attacked Ms. Warren

The source is Lizzy's actions. She's desperately trying to prove she has NA blood. But she is nothing but a blond blue-eyed 1%-er limousine liberal. You said she should take every advantage she can by being a NA. What a crock. How has this fraud of a women ever experienced oppression because of her so-called ethnicity? What hardship has she ever experienced living on a reservation? There's the fraud David. You won't understand it though because you're a complete pompous-ass.

DW: On your other worthless point, the degree of oppression is irrelevant to the issue at hand.

Only because it doesn't fit your story line. You keep defending this Walker. It makes you look like even more of an idiot.

Tom, Tamarac, FL,

Must be something in the water up there.

don pick on us, M@!$%#s. We appear to elect flip flopers because the only way Republicans get elected in Mass is if they are moderate. So the Repubs get elected, do what they do during their term (to satisfy their party) until it's election time; then they try to convince the voters that they are somewhere in the middle. That is when they go into the high-gear flip-flopping mode. It doesn't work....people see right through it

JAS1,

But she is nothing but a blond blue-eyed 1%-er limousine liberal.

Yet you keep defending Romney who claims he grew up poor...or his father grew up poor...I can't remember which one because stories keep changing.

By the way, what does hair and eye color have to do with anything? My niece is half Greek, half Polish, yet she has blue eyes and blond hair. Does that mean she's not half Greek?

Yet you keep defending Romney who claims he grew up poor...or his father grew up poor...I can't remember which one because stories keep changing.

Tell me .. I can't tell if that flip-flopper is a Mormon, a Nomrom, or a Norman. One thing seems certain, if it helped his campaign, he would be a Muslim.

Smiff:

I've had all the crap I can handle from you. If you are going to call me a liar you damned well better have proof. YOU DO NOT! Knowing your penchant for attacking messengers, I provided you with search parameters. There's any number of sources that will provide the proof of my assertion. The fact is you are wrong, and every cite confirms that. I'll let others not as lazy or insecure as you find the truth in this post. The links follow:

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/05/elizabeth-warrens-cherokee-heritage-raises-questions/

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/01/elizabeth-warren-native-american-heritage_n_1467398.html?ref=elections-2012

http://www.bostonherald.com/news/us_politics/view.bg?articleid=1061128421&srvc=rss

Go ahead. Attack the sources.

The mere fact that Ms. Warren doesn't meet your requirements as an oppressed person is irrelevant. She's a Democrat, that's what has your panties in a bunch. No less and no more. There is no fraud. Sadly for you, being angry does not rise to the level of prima facie evidence of guilt.

You cannot support your assertions, you just don't have the mental horsepower to know it.

RedDevPS,

Tell me .. I can't tell if that flip-flopper is a Mormon, a Nomrom, or a Norman. One thing seems certain, if it helped his campaign, he would be a Muslim.

I don't think Romney knows who Romney is...anymore or ever...

DW: I've had all the crap I can handle from you.

Good. So get lost.

DW: If you are going to call me a liar you damned well better have proof. YOU DO NOT!

You are. You said Lizzy met the "legal requirements" of being a NA? What exactly again are the legal requirements? That's all you have is Warren's campaign staff scrambling around trying to find a drop of NA blood in her blond and blue-eyed system, and trying to cover up that she may have used that excuse to get a job at Harvard. And the reason for these divesity and Affirmative Action programs is that Native Americans, among others, have been oppressed and disadvantaged over time. It sure looks like Lizzy took advantage of that, just like you said she should in post #1.2. So it's you that brought the subject up and stated it was an acceptable thing to do.

She, and you, are looking real bad on this one.

You also have said you have me on Ignore. That obviously is a lie. So yes, you are a liar.

She's a Democrat, that's what has your panties in a bunch

She's a hypocrite and a liar, just like you.

bayllie: Yet you keep defending Romney who claims he grew up poor..

Really? Where have I done that?

You're just like Walker. Making things up as you go along.

But she is nothing but a blond blue-eyed 1%-er limousine liberal.

Your jealousy is showing, JAS1.

If you are going to call me a liar you damned well better have proof. YOU DO NOT!

Well, D Walker, this one showing proof boils down to a YouTube video she made of her obese self in a red wig singing some patriotic song, and claiming the vid was of Feisty. She is rather like Spanky and Kirk, mythical facts and figures with nary a citation, which, when boiled down, comes back to myth and fruitless ideology, or more commonly known as trolling.

In Internet slang, a troll is someone who posts inflammatory,^[2] extraneous, or off-topicmessages in an online community, such as an online discussion forum, chat room, or blog, with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response^[3] or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll_(Internet)

Technically - you need to be 1/8 something in order to claim it in your heritage. If you use that minority status, you need paperwork to support it. For example: If you apply for a student loan, you need to supply a certificate proving your Indian heritage by enrolling in a federally recognized tribe.

Has anyone asked for her credentials before now? It seems no one did.

But so what?

Meanwhile, Warren’s camp issued statements from five faculty members at the four universities where she’s taught, including Harvard Law School and University of Pennsylvania, to knock down any suggestion she used her Native American background to get hired.

“To suggest that she needed some special advantage to be hired here or anywhere is just silly. She was hired for her great abilities as a teacher and a scholar. Her family tree had nothing to do with it,” wrote Jay Westbrook, chairman of the business law school at the University of Texas at Austin, who hired Warren.

Does anyone remember the ad about wolves in sheep's clothing? With the red evil eyes... Gees, for some reason that ad came to mind when I saw the title of this article about Scott "Centerfold" Brown (and co-sponsor of the blunt amendment).

Does anyone remember the ad about wolves in sheep's clothing

Who can ever forget the "Demon Sheep" ad? Classic! lol

Smiff:

You are a serious piece of defective work. I've told you before, although I have you on "ignore", I check from time to time to see if you've regained you sanity. Nope, no change.

Taking advantage of opportunities is a bad thing? You lend a whole new dimension of crazy to the Republican Party.

As far as being oppressed. By your standards, Ms. Warren is quite oppressed. As a one-per-center, she is the victim of the class warfare from which you are supposedly protecting her. Wow. With friends like you, who needs enemies? Hey, oppressed is oppressed, right?

@leftliberalliars..

Your posts suggest that you are far too intelligent to have that screen name. Do you mean to imply that there are no reactionary (far right) liars? Almost all politicians are liars. Surely you know that. It's just a matter of how often and how egregiously. Some are forced into lies. Some find it easier to lie.Regardless...I think you can do better than that.

But your math doesn't add up...

The only way to move toward true bipartisan politics would be if we had an even 50/50 split in the Senate and a 268/267 split in the House.

There aren't 535 reps. Also, a big part of the problem is that neither party is willing to do what is necesary to move ahead. I'm not sure that an even split is going to fix the gridlock. I believe, and many others do as well, that we need a 3rd and maybe 4th party like Italy has but that hasn't really been a panacea for them, has it. Also, it's worth pointing out that Hitler was elected by only 38% of the popular vote in Germany in the only election he ever won. I believe that Texas has also elected at least one governor with less than 40% of the vote. So multiple parties also has its pitfalls. The long and short of it is that, I'm afraid, the American people must own up to the fact that it is their fault the system is broken, not the politicians. Being angry at politicians for corruuption, greed, graft, and lying is like being angry at a kid for wanting to play and watch TV. It's up to us to put the fear of God in lying,theiving politicians and we haven't done it. It's our fault. Thomas Jefferson- probably my fav historical figure- wrote "God forbid that we go 20 years without a revolution." We haven't lived up to our end.

I think of dabbling in politics as being about as savory as playing in a toilet bowl that won't flush but the truth is that until a lot of good people decide to get dirty and tolerate being thrown at with mud and lies and having every misdeed you ever committed being aired, this will continue. We the people are the ones failing. Not the politicians. We should have been in the streets against Nixon, Reagan, maybe Ford (demanding an elected president), certainly both bushes, probably Clinton. Not a one has served us. Not one. And we took it. We have lost the respect of our "leaders".

Yeah, but it sure would be funny to see Obama agree to play Brown in B-ball.

Or should we go with Harvard pimped out Warren to fulfill racial quotas?

MA will go with whomever can show the most progressive attitude. So Brown is playing it up.

We don't get to vote in that race, although I'm sure both will let you give them money :D

Instead we get to watch as San Diego went from Red to Blue last year...and looks to continue that trend. When it gets to North County I'll be impressed. We have some real 'winners' out here (issa and hunter)

Instead we get to vote for Feinstein or...Feinsten. Seriously, of the 20 senate candidates running, do you actually think she has a chance of losing?

Which is too bad, I don't like her any more.

[Instead we get to watch as San Diego went from Red to Blue last year...]

Really...huh...no wonder heads are exploding in SD...fer sher...gnarly dude...totally...like, whateverrrrr...

Oh, and isn't Issa a crook?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darrell_Issa

Or should we go with Harvard pimped out Warren to fulfill racial quotas?

We have "white Hispanics" with Zimmerman, so it's not so far-fetched to have "white Native Americans" like with Lizzy.

If an African-American goes to Africa, are they an African-American-African?

Heck yes he is.

I said 'winners'. Not winners.

Hunter is a moron and Issa is a crook :) I detest them both.

Bilbray will be losing his congressional seat to Lori Saldana courtesy of re-districting. They sacked billbray but made both Issa and Hunter more secure in their districts.
Either way, CA will be putting up 3-7 more democrats to the House.

Scott Brown voted with almost every other Republican in the Senate for the Blunt Amendment. I don't see that as standing tall. Scott Brown is a "F"king chameleon and prostitute.

Psst - Bev.: how would you describe Lizzy Warren's use of her supposed heredity?

Perhaps a tad 'opportunistic'?

Anyone who goes out and gets put on a ballot is 'opportunistic'.

how would you describe Lizzy Warren's use of her supposed heredity?

Certainly not as low as one's use of his supposed 'lawyer-lizzism". Clearly, there is a pent-up monkey in this room that needs a spanking.

Spanky-

Psst - Bev.: how would you describe Lizzy Warren's use of her supposed heredity?

Perhaps a tad 'opportunistic'?

No, Spanks . Since you went there, unlike some Caucasians who think they ethnicity is the only pure one on the planet; I would say proud of her heritage. I'd also say she is someone who wants to represent her heritage.

I bet if you shook your family tree you'll probably find some African heritage. If your male ancestors are anything like you, I'm say they chased some skirts in those slave cabins.

If your male ancestors are anything like you, I'm say they chased some skirts in those slave cabins.

Ah Bev .. I would almost be inclined to agree, except we all know Spanky's breed would never have risen out of the gas-filled Laz-y Boy chair to chase some tail around a cabin. Of course, had the advent of the Hoveround (never mind that it is electric) been around, his ilk would have been chasing those skirts all over the place.

Bev the bigot making assumptions without facts, as usual.

Have you looked into your closet lately?

That was the point I was trying to make. See above.

Seems to me the people of Mass. have a choice between someone who stands with President Obama when it is politically expedient for him to do so or someone like Elizabeth Warren who will stand with the President all the time and work with him to protect the 99%.

Never underestimate the GOP/TP love for male beauty queens. Reagan, Schwarzenegger, Brown - all Peppard poster boys for Paul Varjak in Breakfast at Tiffany's. In the GOP/TP world, brawn over brains wins every time. I prefer brawn-y as a quicker-picker-upper and nothing more.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-6163112-503544.html