The Elizabeth Warren v. Scott Brown thread

[San Juan Sun]

LOL! That sounds like an objective person to make this claim.

The fact that Harvard didn't take the fact that she embellished her ethnicity into account doesn't change the fact that she did it. They just ignored it or were unaware.

[Color Me Badd Fan]

The fact that Harvard didn't take the fact that she embellished her ethnicity into account doesn't change the fact that she did it. They just ignored it or were unaware.

To be sure, Elizabeth Warren was qualified to obtain her position, she's not some hack professor (like Barack Obama was). The question is whether she received more preference on her way up and whether it was the cherry on top when Harvard was considering her. What we do know is her education credentials were not nearly up to the level of the rest of the faculty and that in fact there's only one Ivy League law professor overall with worse educational credentials.

That said, there is too much emphasis on those credentials and Warren hasn't proven to be unworthy of her position. For all we know she had a stomach flu the day of her LSAT 40 years ago and she ended having to go to Rutgers.

The other thing we know is she checked that box all the way until she made it to Harvard. The timing in all of this is highly suspicious.

RF, do you expect Fried, a colleague for at least a decade, to not stick up for her? Harvard has the pick of the litter and they can certainly find qualified minority professors who they don't have to bring on simply because they're minorities. The point is the minority status both gives an advantage to equally qualified minority candidates over white candidates. But more importantly it gave Warren equal footing with people that are more than 1/32 minority, and she wasn't deserving of that.

[Moliere]

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Governm...+Government%29

[Jacob]

But a 1997 Fordham Law Review piece described her as Harvard Law School's "first woman of color," based, according to the notes at the bottom of the story, on a "telephone interview with Michael Chmura, News Director, Harvard Law (Aug. 6, 1996)."

The mention was in the middle of a lengthy and heavily-annotated Fordham piece on diversity and affirmative action and women. The title of the piece, by Laura Padilla, was "Intersectionality and positionality: Situating women of color in the affirmative action dialogue."

"There are few women of color who hold important positions in the academy, Fortune 500 companies, or other prominent fields or industries," the piece says. "This is not inconsequential. Diversifying these arenas, in part by adding qualified women of color to their ranks, remains important for many reaons. For one, there are scant women of color as role models. In my three years at Stanford Law School, there were no professors who were women of color. Harvard Law School hired its first woman of color, Elizabeth Warren, in 1995."

http://www.politico.com/blogs/burns-...an-123526.html

This lady is the conservative's caricature of liberalism.

[Color Me Badd Fan]

http://www.politico.com/blogs/burns-...an-123526.html

This lady is the conservative's caricature of liberalism.

To the extent the libs stick up for Warren and this behavior they're betraying their diversity ideals. In a nutshell, we have a white woman who posed as a minority woman and appears to have benefited from it possibly to the detriment of an equally qualified minority person. It's akin to saying it's okay for a person to do this as long as they have the right political leanings.

[Jacob]

To the extent the libs stick up for Warren and this behavior they're betraying their diversity ideals. In a nutshell, we have a white woman who posed as a minority woman and appears to have benefited from it possibly to the detriment of an equally qualified minority person. It's akin to saying it's okay for a person to do this as long as they have the right political leanings.

Same goes for Harvard. Even more embarrassing for them. They touted her fake minority status much more than she did. They have the excuse that they relied on her. Then again, that should be even more embarrassing. It is obvious to every sub-par candidate whose application for admittance to Harvard Law School was rejected that Ms. Warren is not a "woman of color." Obvious to everyone except for the affirmative action blow-hards in the administration, I guess.

[Color Me Badd Fan]

Same goes for Harvard. Even more embarrassing for them. They touted her fake minority status much more than she did. They have the excuse that they relied on her. Then again, that should be even more embarrassing. It is obvious to every sub-par candidate whose application for admittance to Harvard Law School was rejected that Ms. Warren is not a "woman of color." Obvious to everyone except for the affirmative action blow-hards in the administration, I guess.

I read something about this over the weekend -- doesn't Harvard (and all universities) have to report to the feds regarding their minority hires and faculty? And aren't some of the federal grants contingent on them making a certain number of minority hires?

[oxcoug]

So there is no evidence that she benefited from the claimed heritage, and people agree with me that it could have easily been held against her?

Ummm... who - at Harvard? Penn? - was going to hold that against her? That's silly. You know very well that no one on Harvard or Penn law faculty in the late 20th c. is going to hold that against her.

[Moliere]

Pow Wow Chow!

Barnes also called the cookbook “silly.”

“Cherokees don’t even traditionally have powwows,” she said.

[Jacob]

Ummm... who - at Harvard? Penn? - was going to hold that against her? That's silly. You know very well that no one on Harvard or Penn law faculty in the late 20th c. is going to hold that against her.

Nobody anywhere. The whole point of this is that she is not Indian and doesn't look remotely Indian. She's a WASP. Virtually nobody anywhere would treat a WASP differently because the may have had a great great grandfather who might have been Cherokee.

[RobinFinderson]

Nobody anywhere. The whole point of this is that she is not Indian and doesn't look remotely Indian. She's a WASP. Virtually nobody anywhere would treat a WASP differently because the may have had a great great grandfather who might have been Cherokee.

See folks? Even Jacob can see that it is ridiculous to think that Warren claimed this heritage with the expectation of receiving preferential treatment.

[Jacob]

See folks? Even Jacob can see that it is ridiculous to think that Warren claimed this heritage with the expectation of receiving preferential treatment.

Is that the point you've been debating? Interesting.
Sorry to have been imprecise in my previous wording. Also, it appears you have read more into my post that what I said.
It is obvious that Harvard treated her differently. They touted her as the school's first "woman of color." They don't do that for just any WASP. Only those who claim to be Indian--even when the claim is unsupported or insignificant. But they didn't so treat her due to her heritage (which I what I said) it is because she asserted that heritage. Which assertion is false by all reasonable standards.

[Moliere]

So apparently Elizabeth warren has allegedly been practicing law in Massachusetts without being licensed to do so. This can't end well.

[All-American]

So apparently Elizabeth warren has allegedly been practicing law in Massachusetts without being licensed to do so. This can't end well.

I disagree. (Or did you just mean for her?)

[CardiacCoug]

I disagree. (Or did you just mean for her?)

Yep. Doesn't look like the fact that she has been practicing law without a license will make it anywhere into the mainstream press. Also the fact that she made a few hundred thousand representing an insurance company trying to withhold money from asbestos victims. Dare I call that ironic (CUF ruling?) for a liberal supposed champion of the working class to represent a corporation against blue collar victims, all without a license? Naturally this information will remain on conservative blogs only.

I make fun of mainstream media conspiracy theorists generally, but I'm starting to wonder....