Elizabeth Warren Made One Mistake and Will Never Be President Because of It

Warren, who announced her intention to run for the presidency this week, spent much of her career before entering politics in law, which she taught at universities around the country, including UT-Austin, Harvard, and Penn. Particularly expert in bankruptcy, middle-class personal finance, and consumer protection, since entering Congress in 2013, Warren has spent much of her time pushing for better regulation of financial institutions. She was, for example, essential to the creation of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFBP), a federal agency designed to protect Americans from unfair, deceptive, or predatory financial lenders and other companies. Trump, naturally, has done everything in his power to kneecap the CFPB, but Warren is one of those rare politicians who doesn't just say she cares about the middle class on the campaign trail; she actually fights for it in Congress. She's smart, qualified, and well-liked in her state—all of which makes her more deserving of the presidency than the spray-tanned ogre currently occupying the Oval Office.

Alas, I fear that Elizabeth Warren's chances of winning the Democratic nomination are slim to none. Not because she doesn't deserve it (she does), but because of her one glaring misstep.

I'm talking, of course, about her claims of Native American ancestry, which became a national story thanks to Scott Brown, her 2012 opponent to represent Massachusetts in the US Senate. During the race, Brown brought this issue up to discredit her, but it didn't work; Warren beat him by more than 230,000 votes. And yet, it is sure to dog her throughout the presidential race, and, I believe, will ultimately lead to her defeat in the primary, if not the general election.

First, let's get the facts straight. Despite Trump's talking points, Elizabeth Warren did not get her job at Harvard because she said she was Native American. How do I know this? Because the Boston Globe, a reputable journalistic outlet, scoured old documents and interviewed dozens of Warren's colleagues at Harvard Law, and found that her claims of Native American heritage had no bearing on her career at Harvard or anywhere else. From the Globe:

In the most exhaustive review undertaken of Elizabeth Warren’s professional history, the Globe found clear evidence, in documents and interviews, that her claim to Native American ethnicity was never considered by the Harvard Law faculty, which voted resoundingly to hire her, or by those who hired her to four prior positions at other law schools. At every step of her remarkable rise in the legal profession, the people responsible for hiring her saw her as a white woman.

The Globe examined hundreds of documents, many of them never before available, and reached out to all 52 of the law professors who are still living and were eligible to be in that Pound Hall room at Harvard Law School. Some are Warren’s allies. Others are not. Thirty-one agreed to talk to the Globe — including the law professor who was, at the time, in charge of recruiting minority faculty. Most said they were unaware of her claims to Native American heritage and all but one of the 31 said those claims were not discussed as part of her hire. One professor told the Globe he is unsure whether her heritage came up, but is certain that, if it did, it had no bearing on his vote on Warren’s appointment.

Let me repeat that for you: Claims of Native American heritage has no bearing in Warren's appointment at Harvard or anywhere else. While there is no reason to doubt the veracity of the Globe's reporting (and if you think dozens of lawyers would lie on the record to save a colleague's reputation, you don't know dozens of lawyers), many of Warren's critics have pointed out that Harvard used her self-identified Native status to promote itself as diverse. This was clearly unwise, if not willfully dishonest, on the school's part, but how is that Warren's fault? (A) She was a professor, not a publicist, and (B) she genuinely thought she was Native American based on old family lore. That's like blaming me because my dad told me he played banjo in the Rolling Stones (which, for the record, he definitely did).

Now, does having a distant Native American ancestor, as the DNA test Warren released last year confirmed, make her Native American? No, it does not. Much to the chagrin of every white person who claims to be part Cherokee, Native status does not adhere to the one-drop rule, and when Warren released her disastrous video affirming her DNA, the response from actual Native Americans was largely—but not entirely—critical. As Cherokee Nation secretary of state Chuck Hoskin Jr. said in a statement, “It makes a mockery out of DNA tests and its legitimate uses while also dishonoring legitimate tribal governments and their citizens, whose ancestors are well documented and whose heritage is proven." Membership, in other words, isn't based on blood; it's based on family lineage and documented tribal membership.

This, as the Washington Post pointed out, is somewhat of a shift. In 2012, Cherokee Nation principal chief Bill John Baker responded to Warren's claims of Native ancestry by saying, "I wish every congressman and senator in the US had a kinship or felt a kinship to the Cherokee Nation." It was Scott Brown, not Elizabeth Warren, whom he thought should apologize.

Regardless, in 2018, Warren's assertion that a DNA test proved the old family lore correct was not well received by many on the left. It was a dumb move on her part, which is kind of a shame because the whole point of the DNA test was to dunk on Donald Trump, who claimed he would donate a million dollars to the charity of Warren's choice if she would take a DNA test.

Of course, this being Trump's America, even when she took the DNA test, he somehow still won that battle. Did he donate a cent to charity? Of course not. Instead, he denied ever have made that particular wager, his fans believed him, and large swaths of the left bared their teeth at Warren because she offended Native Americans. This was surely not her intention, of course, but intention, as we've learned, is now less important than impact.

Releasing that DNA test and the accompanying video was a clear misstep on Warren's part. She tried to force Trump to pay up and she failed. But, with all due respect to Native Americans, who are completely right to be annoyed when white people claim to be one of them, her misstep seems pretty minor compared to Donald Trump's long history of lies, gaffes, and intentional offenses. Her family told her she was part Cherokee and she believed them.

Should that really be enough to cost her the presidency of the United States? She didn't say that she grabs women by the pussy. She didn't order children to be separated from their parents. She didn't cozy up to authoritarians or abandon our allies both here and abroad. And she, unlike some people, hasn’t repeatedly fought against tribal interests. And yet, she will not be our next president. Why? Because the left requires a level of purity that the right just does not. Republicans can get over huge character flaws and bad policy positions to rally around a candidate. The left will stay home if their ideal candidate isn’t on the ballot—or, in this case, the candidate isn't quite pure enough.

This is a shame, because Elizabeth Warren’s policy positions would actually help the citizens and residents of this country. She's a solid progressive—and not the totalitarian kind. In the long term, she’s in favor of Medicare for All. In the short term, she’s in favor of upholding the Affordable Care Act as well as holding health insurance and pharmaceutical companies accountable for rising health care prices. She’s endorsed a Green New Deal and rebuilding our infrastructure, both of which will create middle-class jobs. She’s for restoring tax rates on the richest Americans to pre-Trump levels and using that revenue to tackle the student loan crisis.

She supports labor movements and renewable energy and ending subsidies for fossil fuels. She's in favor of campaign finance reform and comprehensive immigration reform and using federal regulations like Glass-Steagall to reduce the risk of financial collapse in the future. She's also for criminal justice reform, sensible gun laws, and the legalization of cannabis. She's not a pie-in-the-sky promise-maker with no plans to pay for her it. She's the real deal, and because of this one misstep—because she believed what her family told her—she is unlikely to ever be president.

If you need an example of double standards in American politics, the fact that Elizabeth Warren is likely unelectable and Donald Trump isn't? Look no further than this.

that her claim to Native American ethnicity was never considered by the Harvard Law faculty, which voted resoundingly to hire her, or by those who hired her to four prior positions at other law schools>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Warren is haunted by a bevy of projected fantasy lies. She once related how a law professor sexually harassed her by chasing her around his private office. (Come to find out later that the man who she spoke about was a paraplegic in a wheel chair with polio. He did not have the capacity to harm her.).

Its much like Hillary Clinton claiming she was under fire in Bosnia, and escaped. There is not one Democrat women candidate for president who has not been a drama queen, and after a while has trouble separating personal fantasy from reality. Warren would become a national security risk if she ever was elected president, and indeed may be one now.

**********************************************

See:

https://www.boston.com/news/politics/2017/10/22/elizabeth-warren-recalls-story-of-sexual-harassment-by-law-school-colleague

********************************************************

Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) said on NBC’s Meet the Press last weekend that a former professor sexually harassed her when she was a young law professor at the University of Houston. This is the same professor, who died in 1997, that she eulogized at his funeral, joking about his fondness for her and their interactions.

“Yes, I have a ‘me, too’ story too,” Warren said. “I was a baby law professor and so excited to have my first real teaching job. And there was this senior faculty member who, you know, would tell dirty jokes and make comments about my appearance.”

“And one day he asked me if I would stop by his office, which I didn’t think much about,” Warren said. “And I did. And he slammed the door and lunged for me.”

“It was like a bad cartoon,” Warren said. “He’s chasing me around the desk, trying to get his hands on me.”

“And I kept saying, ‘You don’t want to do this. You don’t want to do this. I have little children at home. Please don’t do this,” Warren said. “And trying to talk calmly. And at the same time, what was flickering through my brain is, ‘If he gets hold of me, I’m going to punch him right in the face.’”

Warren also posted on Facebook about her “me too” experience.

“If all the women who have been sexually harassed or assaulted wrote ‘me too’ as a status, we might give people a sense of the magnitude of the problem,” Warren wrote. #MeToo

But media reports reveal that Warren’s opinion of the late Professor Eugene Smith has changed over the years.

The Boston Globe reported this week that Warren recounted the same incident in a “more light-hearted manner” at a memorial service after the professor’s death 20 years ago.

“During the service after his death in 1997, Warren spoke fondly of law professor Eugene Smith and told the gathered mourners she was laughing as Smith chased her around his desk, according to a colleague’s memoir,” the Globe reported, referring to a book written by retired professor John Mixon.

But the Globe spoke with Warren, who said her perspective of what took place has changed over the years.

“It was 20 years later, and he didn’t have power over me anymore,” said Warren, who was at that time a Harvard law professor.

The Globe inquired about the contrast between the two accounts:

She did not directly answer when asked if she spoke fondly of Smith at his memorial or if she told mourners she was laughing as Smith tried to grab her in his office.

“I made it clear that I was just fine,” Warren said.

The Globe described Warren’s changed narrative as an “evolution” arrived at “amid changing attitudes about harassment and increasing empowerment of women to speak up.”

Warner’s colleague also told the Globe his written account about Warren and Smith may not have been accurate.

“I may have been wrong saying she was laughing,” Mixon told the Globe.

The paper also reported that Warren failed to mention on Meet The Press that Smith was severely disabled by polio and was in a wheelchair because of his disability.

Mixon described Smith’s disability this way:

Gene Smith was lucky to be alive. Shortly before the Salk vaccine made polio history, Gene contracted the disease in his late teens. He was among the polio victims to survive by forced breathing in an iron lung.

The New Boston Post reported:

According to Mixon, Smith, a teenager at the time of the disease’s onset, “eventually gained enough strength to leave the iron lung” but “walked like a crab, swinging his almost useless arms to keep his balance.”

Mixon recalled that Smith, born in 1933, would struggle to reach his second-floor bedroom, “without realizing he was weakening his muscles and hastening the onset of post-polio syndrome which eventually disabled him entirely, even from riding around in his electric cart.”

Warren still likely has an imaginary friend? President Trump made the point directly, “ Check with her psychiatrist...” and there is a LOT to that.
*************************************************

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.