Elizabeth Warren's speech right now

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Hi again, MRA. Still unemployed and single, I take it

Nice try. I'm married over 12 years with kids and quite employed, with the government no less.

MRA = Male Rape Apologist (absurd claim). There can be no apology for rape for it is a crime, just as it is a crime to have a personal mail server in your home withholding classified documents
from FOIA requests.

If anyone is an MRA --an apologist for rape, it is Hillary Clinton apologizing and covering for the adulteries of Bill Clinton who abused his power over subordinate women to engage
in sexual acts with them such as with Monica Lewinsky. Amusingly, it passed into the lexicon that a synonym for blowjob was a "Lewinsky".

This is typical of what liberals do when the truth is inconvenient: make absurd "seriousness of the charge" claims, paint labels on people that have a subtle connotation to crime, and keep blabbing it and blabbing it
never stopping, refusing to hear truth, refusing to consider their words and world view are based on lies because they themselves are liars and there is no truth in them. They love to bring the charge of hypocrite
when the great irony is that they are the biggest hypocrites of all.

Now that we see I am not a mysogynist (I'm married and love women, especially the pretty ones like my wife), and not an MRA because rape is abhorrent, I guess you'll have to pick out some other label to try and stick it to me.

Hillary isn't black so you can't bring out the racist charge, she's not a lesbian so you can't call me a homophobic bigot, so all you got is crawling around in the gutter you live in to throw some other kind of sewage at me. Keep trying and I'll keep laughing at you. Ha ha.

I would personally appreciate if you could stop posting.

Typical liberal response. When you do not agree with me, I demand you stop exercising your First Amendment right. If you do not like the poster's comments, stop reading the thread.

Yes indeed. Kind of like Hillary telling Trump to delete his account.
Yep, it’s all about silencing the opposition.

You really need a lesson in "Delete Your Account" in addition to a lesson on the First Amendment.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I would personally appreciate if you could stop posting. Especially stop posting nauseating statements like, "I love women, especially the pretty ones like my wife." Gross. Thank God there are real men in th world, who actually DO love women. What a scumbag.

Gross that I think my wife is pretty? Guess I should just like ugly women then. Well, here you go:

http://www.returnofkings.com/22653/the-7-ugliest-women-in-the-democratic-party


You probably fit right in with that group. You enjoy yourself the rest of the day now, baby-doll. Ta-ta.

WTF is wrong with you? Small penis like Trump?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:She is absolutely amazing and going ALL in on Trump. Love it. On MSNBC, if anyone is interested.

Which of them is the better hater of the other??

[Anonymous]

What Warren and others don't realize is that much of their rhetoric goes over the heads of the majority of the electorate - Republican and Democrats.

I am a liberal and out of all of the tweets that flew between Warren and Trump, what is the one that has registered for most people?

It was Trump's moniker for Warren: "Pocahontas"!

With all of the presidential & VP debates what people remember are just a few moments: Ford saying that Eastern Europe was not under Soviet control, Bentsen's put down of Quayle not being anything like JFK, Reagan with his condescending remark to Carter "there you go again", Reagan saying that he would not use Mondale's youth for political advantage in response to charges that Reagan was too old, Gore with his sighing and walking into GWB's space during a debate.

Trump is a master at branding: his "crooked Hillary" moniker will stick because it is catchy and reinforces the image of dishonesty that she has with 60% of the electorate including many Democrats. I don't know if most voters are aware of Warren using her questionable Cherokee heritage in connection with her position at Harvard but constantly calling her Pocohontas will help with branding her as someone who joined Harvard based on questionable antecedents and since many Americans have issues with affirmative action, it shows them how others are getting a leg up at what they perceive to be their advantage.

BTW, I am no supporter of Trump but his branding of opponents works whether one likes it or not. Of course, Trump has his own problems.

[Anonymous]

Actually, by Twitter metrics, "delete your account" was the most popular one. And it will stick

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Really? This shit again? When your candidate has pretended to be no less than 2 other people so he could talk about his sex life openly?

Not defending Trump. Cannot stand him. But, Warren has baggage, as well. She talks about income inequality--but look at her own background. She talks about the corrupt banks--but she made money off of foreclosed homes. She talks about the cost of college, but look at what she made at Harvard--for teaching very few classes. She talks about giving everyone a fair shake--yet she claimed minority status. (Look at Harvard law faculty--I went through three or four pages of them, and they ALL had been to Ivy schools. Yet, Warren did not. Odd. She was hired there about a year after she was identified as Native American.) She's a poseur. Yes, she is entertaining, bright, and personable. And a FRAUD.

Nice story bro. Charles Fried, the staunch conservative who hired her to HLS says you're wrong. And as someone who was taught by her, I can say she was one of the best profs there.

Let me just add that Warren was considered a rising star in academic circles while before she showed any political aspirations. If you think she wasn't a successful scholar and didn't warrant her place on Harvard's faculty, you just don't like her. You've dead wrong on the facts.

She was considered an academic star unril a lot of her research was exposed as being weak.

http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2010/07/considering-elizabeth-warren-the-scholar/60211/

To me, Warren really exposes herself as an unsophisticated talking head when she riffs on student loans. She generally likes to claim that student loan borrowers shouldn't be paying higher interest rates than the Fed Funds rate, which completely ignores (a) the different credit risks for the different class of borrowers and (b) that lower student loan interest rates would actually implode the federal student loan programs because the program clearly depends on interest revenue for future sources of lending. Either she is being completely disingenuous or she is making basic mistakes that no alleged superstar in the area of bankruptcy law should be making.

My read is that because her populist streak resonates so well on campus, the academy holds her up as an alleged superstar. Ironically, the same people that tell us that diversity is important so that group think doesn't set in seem to overlook the fact that the academy is one of the least viewpoint diverse professional areas AND the members of the academy are the gatekeepers to the ivory tower.

Can't speak to her as an in classroom lecturer, but as someone who read her casebook cover to cover and practices in a related area of law, I do not find her to be particularly insightful in either the academic context or an application context. In fact, I seem to recall a few years back she was part of that loose coalition in the field of bankruptcy that was agitating for reform of the BK code to make it less friendly for secured creditors and more friendly to certain classes of unsecured creditors (like hourly labor and retirees).

Trump is absolutely a fraud, but so is Warren. Whether you see one of the two or both as a fraud is almost 100% determined by your political affiliation.

PP, thanks for your thoughtful comments.

Warren seems to suffer from what all too many lawyers do--know it all-itis. I find it ironic that she has chosen finance as her political target area when she seems to know so little it. I suspect that like many lawyers, she went into law because she is not good in math.

She clearly knows very little about the economics of lending as PP has shown. And I am pretty sure that despite all her fulminating about derivatives she would be very hard pressed to describe how they work.

[Anonymous]

To me, Warren really exposes herself as an unsophisticated talking head when she riffs on student loans. She generally likes to claim that student loan borrowers shouldn't be paying higher interest rates than the Fed Funds rate, which completely ignores (a) the different credit risks for the different class of borrowers and (b) that lower student loan interest rates would actually implode the federal student loan programs because the program clearly depends on interest revenue for future sources of lending. Either she is being completely disingenuous or she is making basic mistakes that no alleged superstar in the area of bankruptcy law should be making.

I've even heard the Dems talk about student loans vs mortgages and why are the rates so much higher. Totally ignoring the fact that a mortgage is secured with a house.