Liberal Progressive - Elizabeth Warren, former Rehnquist Appointee, Obama Appointee, Uses “Feminist” Card Against Scott Brown – Liz Grow Some Skin!

Scott Brown (R-MA) - Independent Brown fends off attacks by Progressive "Feminist" Oklahoma's Own Lizzie Warren

Harvard Professor Elizabeth Warren, who is being funded by the "The Liberal Progressive Change Campaign Committee,"(Frederick News Post, MD), has had a most interesting career thus far. Elizabeth Herring Warren, who was appointed by Chief Justice Rehnquist, as a Member of the Federal Judicial Education Committee (from Consumer Protection Agency Official Biography on Elizabeth Warren), went on to hold her first “government job” as an appointee of Barack Obama to handle TARP, and now she wants to be the Senator from Massachusetts, the Progressive Democrat to replace Republican, Scott Brown.

Those Progressives who admire Ms. Warren, are rather miffed at the entire Democrat Party failing to embrace Communism (Communism and Progressives are interchangeable), but specifically Obama, whom members feel is not effective in furthering the Progressive agenda (i.e. turning the U.S. from a Democracy to the former Soviet Union – breadlines, poverty and all). In speaking of Warren, they suggest she would be a perfect member to form a new party, devoid of Democrats, and based on Progressives only: (David Lindoff)

I’m not sure how such a movement could be started. Perhaps Sen. Sanders, who long ago showed the way to run and win House and Senate elections as an independent and a self-described socialist, could start the ball rolling by contacting some of his caucus comrades and any labor activists and leaders he’s close to, and proposing the idea. Maybe Elizabeth Warren, who was betrayed and trashed by Obama after developing the idea for a Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, and who is said to be eyeing a run for the Senate seat held by Massachusetts Republican Scott Brown, would decide running on such a party’s ticket would be a satisfying form of payback, and could tip more principled members of the caucus, like Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-OH), Keith Ellison (D-MN) or Sheila Jackson Lee (D-TX), to come over. (Kucinich, who has been humiliated by his party repeatedly despite being one of its smartest and most principled members, and who has now been gerrymandered out of his job, should finally be willing to stop helping the Democratic Party pretend it is a progressive organization, and should walk out.)

To be admired by the right and by the left throughout a lifetime, leads one to take a harder look at Warren, who most likely (coming of age during the 1960’s), like most young women of her time (See Hillary Clinton) were known as “Goldwater Girls” – conservative youth, it would fit with Ms. Warren’s background, coming as she did out of Oklahoma.
However, that said, is she qualified and tough enough to take on one Scott Brown? Brown, who has voted straight down the middle, is maligned currently by Tea Party Groups in the State, and who has a record that make most conservatives look askance – Brown does not vote straight party line – he is an Olympia Snow, a Susan Collins, a wild card that the Republican’s cannot always be quite sure if he’ll go along with the “program” for the sake of “party unity” – Brown votes the way he feels his constituents would benefit most. Oddly, it has worked for him in Massachusetts, where the majority of the Bay State’s electorate is: unenrolled.

That may be news to Lizzy Warren – who showed a serious lack of mettle in recent attacks on Brown.

She called him a Tea Party Member (obviously not sure what Tea Party is, or means for that matter), while not taking the time to understand the Massachusetts Tea Party, perhaps the most fiscally and socially conservative Tea Party groups in the nation, don’t often care much for Scott Brown .

Then she insulted Brown for not being moral enough – seriously – Lizzie apparently felt that Brown’s posing for Cosmo (How high is the wager that she owned the copy), was not appropriate for a young man who would be Senator. (Globe) Brown fired back – and said something not quite good enough from Warren’s perspective (about how he struggled harder and worked harder to get his degree, than say Warren, which is the truth)and she felt he was being “sexist”!

The hue and cry went up about the Globe the rest of the Bay State and most likely Bernie Sanders is lighting candles in Vermont to ease the pain poor Lizzie must be feeling.
Give us all a break and buck up Elizabeth. Call it like you see it, and stop trying to whine your way into the Senate on the back of someone who actually deserves to be there. As a feminist, there is nothing worse than watching a woman who is capable stand back and act like the Virgin of Harvard, or worse, a True Elite Progressive, who’s nose is stuck so far up her own behind, she cannot see the forest for the trees!. It is insulting to women everywhere – period. Pick a fight, then pick a good topic, and stick to it.
One can’t have their cake and eat it too, that won’t work with the Massachusetts Electorate. So, go negative Lizzie, but keep it about the issues – go on Brown’s record, but be truthful, because, the unenrolled have been watching him like a hawk, and know how he votes.

Stop maligning the Tea Party, if one didn’t know better, one would think you were one of Tea Party members who ran in local elections as Democrats and won, and who will continue to use that avenue to change from within – after all – Rehnquist appointee, are you really a Progressive at all?

From this point of view, it is apparent that although having supported Scott Brown for Senate in the special election (Martha was not qualified, period), and already knowing the Centerfold story was beat to death and is a non-issue (see Hillbuzz.org), to have a woman run for office, that woman should be qualified, (not an academic appointed by an academic administration, with no experience whatsoever in legislation but rhetoric), which is why, regardless of the fact that you a woman, it matters not when it comes to qualifications. Hillary Clinton is a qualified woman, she is qualified for the Senate, and she is more than qualified to be President – she has a record one can be proud of, and she has worked both sides of the aisle to get something accomplished – so has Scott Brown. That’s a hard act to follow Lizzie. You’re no Hillary Clinton, heck you’re not even a Scott Brown.

Palin’s Decision - Intends to Lead Direction of the Individual as Exceptional American – Video – The Single Most Effective Force against The Machine

Palin, in the mold of the founders - image NYSun

Sarah Palin’s PAC released the video below to supporters yesterday – the email subject title: “Are You Ready to Rumble?” – belies the power behind the message the video (shown below) contains. Her decision to walk away from the GOP race for the 2012 nomination, could not have come easy, however, the understanding that her style of “calling them like she sees them”, regardless of party. (Although she will align with the Republican’s at times, depending upon the record of a particular incumbent, she may endorse the opposition (should there be a Tea Party Candidate) and successfully, in most cases) upend the race through the primary process – see her effectiveness in this respect in 2010.)

It is a fact that the Office of the Presidency does come with some restraints, and, just as with pivotal individuals who shaped the nation, and never served in the role of President, Palin will be that later day Samuel Adams, who played a major role in shaping the Revolution, or perhaps a later day Tomas Jefferson, one who shaped the nation, shaped a political party and then took an Executive role in Government. The later were chosen as examples, perhaps because they are more known to most American’s (or should be), and fit the spirit of the force with which Palin is capable – through her speeches, appearance, books, and letters (Facebook notes) – not unlike the aforementioned. Those who seek to make a chance, recognizing that Sarah Palin is an individual who is sought after by candidates and those who are willing and able to put aside the misconceptions, and often partisan party politics - understanding that Lady of Alaska has the ability to help shape a nation, or perhaps more to the point, remold to the original intent of the Framers.
She has the record to stand on.





Suggested: Poor cinematography aside – “The Undefeated” is worth a look (now available on Amazon.com as a DVD) – although essentially about Sarah Palin, more to the point, it is about the ability of the process of the campaign for the Presidency (or any office), to skew a point of view, to malign without evidence, and to effectively hide, from the majority of American’s, the value of a candidate. In that wise, it is a primer of sorts for the American voter who needs to spend more time personally “vetting” any candidate, for any office, and to ensure that one’s vote is well placed. It is also, from this point of view, an eye-opener – specifically if one thought one knew the depths to which the media would sink, then this will shock and with any candidate, understand that agenda’s are shaped from within a Political Party, with the help of a media gone astray (that evidence is most compelling), to an extent that was foretold through the worries of the framers, reluctant to add “freedom of the press” to the Bill of Rights, concerned that they would, in time, corrupts the process and take part in attempting to destroy the basics of the document that was being prepared to stand the test of time – the U.S. Constitution. (See Letter 84: Alexander Hamilton and his argument that the press could play a powerful role in usurping the government)

“I go further, and affirm that bills of rights, in the sense and to the extent in which they are contended for, are not only unnecessary in the proposed Constitution, but would even be dangerous. They would contain various exceptions to powers not granted; and, on this very account, would afford a colorable pretext to claim more than were granted. For why declare that things shall not be done which there is no power to do? Why, for instance, should it be said that the liberty of the press shall not be restrained, when no power is given by which restrictions may be imposed? I will not contend that such a provision would confer a regulating power; but it is evident that it would furnish, to men disposed to usurp, a plausible pretense for claiming that power. They might urge with a semblance of reason, that the Constitution ought not to be charged with the absurdity of providing against the abuse of an authority which was not given, and that the provision against restraining the liberty of the press afforded a clear implication, that a power to prescribe proper regulations concerning it was intended to be vested in the national government. This may serve as a specimen of the numerous handles which would be given to the doctrine of constructive powers, by the indulgence of an injudicious zeal for bills of rights.”
(From the Federalist Papers, everyone should own a copy for reference specific copy: ISBN-10: 1604248599)

The Video which lends to the comparison



In closing, although it is statistically evident, (probability being what it is), that the current President will not be re-elected, therefore, one can suggest that Palin, with her ability to campaign, and make her voice heard above the fray (whether one appreciates the message or not), is the biggest threat to the powers that would take this nation away from the original intent. Those that dismiss Sarah Palin, out of hand, are doing so either out of a sense of forced bravado or ignorance.

Moments After Palin Announcement the Courting Begins: Candidates calling Sarah, knowing the clout she will carry in 2012.

Palin in Nevada at Tea Party Rally - the ability to draw crowds and votes - image Washington Times

Yesterday, Sarah Palin made the decision not to seek the GOP 2012 nomination and immediately following made an appearance on Fox News’ “On the Record” with Greta. During the Q&A, Palin noted that the phone had been ringing, but declined to say who had called. See the video below .

Those that will have a huge impact on the GOP eight, those seeking Congressional Seats, or Senate Seats: Palin, Christie, Trump and to a lesser extent, Mark Rubio. Those aforementioned carry more weight than any news organization, or more specifically any major political party in determining an outcome. Sit back and enjoy the ride to 212, it’s going to be one of the most interesting elections in recent memory.