This Post Isn't Really about Elizabeth Warren

Posted by Desert Crone NM

I am a fan of Elizabeth Warren, and if you're a liberal like I am, why wouldn't you be. She is a warrior for the poor and middle class. She is outspoken, honest, and sincere. Warren, like President Obama, carries a big stick. However, she has a problem now with her claims to be a minority faculty member at Harvard, which can't be easily dismissed by even her most fervent followers.

Ms. Warren, the darling of the Left much like President Obama was, is already being haled as a presidential candidate by many folks on the Left. That overzealousness, as I see it, gives me butterflies--just a slight feeling of nervousness. I frequently caution those who ballyhoo her as a 2016 Presidential contender with "shouldn't we get her elected to the Senate first?" Let's face it, we don't know how she'll perform as a senator. Many believed a Senator Clinton would also be a bulldog, but instead, she was a (gasp) compromiser. And, lest we forget, a hawk.

My caution has proven to be prescient. As you may know by now, Harvard claimed Ms. Warren as a minority faculty member. Sorry folks, you can't claim minority status by virtue of 1/32 of minority ancestry. Ms. Warren has stated (or at least a campaign staffer has) that she didn't know Harvard made such a claim. I'm a bit skeptical about this since as a high school and college instructor, I was always well aware of the contents of my bio. Secondly, how would Harvard have known about Warren's ancestry if she had not mentioned it.

Like Ms. Warren many Americans claim Native American ancestry with much pride and an abundance of ignorance. For example, my great-grandmother was a Kiowa, who was referred to as Kiowa Woman in the small Oklahoma town where she lived. I only discovered the truth when I was working on a graduate project in folklore in the early 70's and conducted extensive interviews with my grandmother. She rarely discussed her heritage although both my grandmother and mother would've qualified for Oklahoma tuition credits based on their Kiowa ancestry. (My mother's parents left Oklahoma for New Mexico during the Great Depression and Dust Bowl.) In spite of my ancestry, I know very little about the Kiowa Nation, other than what I learned in college history classes. I'm not ashamed of my ancestry, but, frankly, I had nothing to do with it. I certainly wouldn't have claimed to be a minority or allowed anyone else to claim it for me.

However, this issue alone should not hurt her and will probably be a blip on the political radar by Nov. if she will just be honest be about it. The question that arises from the incident is, as a political novice, would she even be ready for the presidency in four years. The incident also tells us that Elizabeth Warren is human with the accompanying flaws. Let's be clear--her authenticity is not based on 1/32 of minority ancestry but of her long advocacy for the underdog. She is what she is--a wealthy white woman who is a bulldog for the poor and middle class.

She has earned our respect and admiration, but let's not make her more than she is, which is exactly what many on the Left did to Barack Obama. Liberal critics of the President emerged as little emoprogs, who became, do I dare say it, emofrogs, croaking their disappointments endlessly. I've often commented that the first time Warren makes a political decision rather than a purist one, many of her starry-eyed fans will scream that she betrayed them.

We liberals desperately want to bestow the hero's cape on someone along with all the unstated expectations that accompany that cape. The emoprogs, bewailing the "impurity" of President Obama, obviously didn't listen to the man but only heard what they wanted to hear. In doing so the critics denied his authenticity as a human being. Let's not make the same mistake with Warren because, as we see now, she is very human.

Let's be honest about Elizabeth Warren. We have no idea how she'll perform in the Senate. Will she be a Sen. Sanders, who, too, is a champion of the poor and middle class but rarely gets a bill passed? Or will she be a pragmatist like President Obama, whose objective is to get as much done for us as possible? Frankly, I hope she's a pragmatist rather than a purist.

The Spine of America

POSTED BY JHW22

OK, after this post, I will no longer give anti-Obama Democrats an ounce of my energy, a second of my time. Why? Because as much as they say they believe it's American to criticize or they're just holding him accountable or yadda yadda fart fart, they really just want to focus on certain things while removing all nuance, complexity and reality. They want to pretend that it's all easy peasy to get exactly what they want despite millions of Americans who don't want those exact same things the exact same ways at the exact same time. After about two years of their shit, I realized there is NO POINT debating, discussing or even acknowledging them. But I still try. Not anymore. After tonight, I am done with the anti-Obama left. We have an election to win and a fantastic President to re-elect. We need to ensure better state and federal legislatures and governorships. We have school boards and city councils to pay attention to. And the anti-Obama left doesn't deserve a fraction of me.

I want to make my final statement on them about one specific thing. One thing that I think symbolizes the difference between them and me.

"Spine."

For years now, I've heard Democrats say Obama "needs to grow a spine" or that he's "spineless." And as often as I, and other sensible Democrats, have tried to counter with facts and reality checks, we never looked at an actual spine.

A spine is the center of our body uniting the left and the right. It bends forward and backward, it turns side to side. It moves. Its point is to connect all the parts and keep us balanced. It is the part of the body used for movement and thought. It's a part of the body that, if damaged, could cause the entire body to stop moving completely. It's made up of parts rather than a single bone. It's a part of our body that we take for granted until we need an excuse to get out of heavy lifting. And it always has our back even when we don't see it. Our spine is what makes us flexible and strong. It makes us able to dodge or walk tall. It does what it needs to do on reflex. It supports the rib cage that houses our hearts and is the base of all the magic of our minds.

When you think of the truth of a spine, of the reality, of its actual role in our lives, Barack Obama not only has a spine. He IS our spine.

"The Base"

POSTED BY JHW22

Jane Hamsher and Adam Green are NOT "The Base". Nor are they "The Far Left".

No, when Obama does something and some people in the Democratic party get mad, "THE Base" is not mad at him. No, when Obama does something and some people in the Democratic party get mad, "THE Far Left" is not mad at him.

As Desert Crone (a regular reader here at Broadway Carl's) and I have discussed many times, Jane Hamsher and Adam Green are NOT the base. Let me say it one more time because I really mean it: they are NOT the base.

How do I know they are not the base? Because they fall in the 15 to 20% of Democrats that consistently find something to be mad about. That is not a base. If it were, we'd be an inverted pyramid and we'd topple over in a hiccup. A base is a large number of supporters who consistently see the policies and leadership as progressive -- meaning forward-moving -- and accept that sometimes a seemingly weak play is necessary in order to get a larger accomplishment secured. A real base pays more attention to the overall and long-term needs rather than the microcosm of creating anger and fear. In fact, the numbers in the Jane Hamsher/Adam Green faction of the Democratic party are even smaller than the number of people who think Sarah Palin didn't go FUBAR in her Tucson video. Also, they are in the same 15% of Democrats who are NOT enthusiastic about voting in 2012 (h/t Desert Crone) -- so tell me how THEY are "THE Base"...

I feel the need to state this bluntly because Lawrence O'Donnell seems to think that these two characters somehow represent "The Base" [note: I am not going to provide any links to back this up for two reasons. One is there are too many. Two, I think my head would explode if I had to listen to or even look at either JH or AG. But you can find any damn episode of The Last Word and probably see one or both of them presented as "The Base"] although I think Lawrence knows better. Lawrence also knows a great deal about creating great television.

I also feel the need to declare this fact about them NOT being "The Far Left" because Chris Matthews referred to the 15% of Democrats who think Obama is "too quick to give in" as "the FAR left". No, Chris. I am the far left. There isn't a political ideology test I could take that wouldn't consider me far left and I am not in that 15% that thinks he is too quick to give in.

So to Lawrence I say, you DO know how to make good television and you also know how to present the truth in a better way than by having those two on your show as much as you do. They represent the 15-percenters yet you give them 50 or 75% of the space in their segments. That's a gross misrepresentation of their role, affect and relevance in the Democratic party. Sure, you need opposition, but dole it out in proportion, will ya? And PLEASE don't associate the word "base" with them when they are on your show.

And Chris, for someone who takes umbrage with people saying the "Democrat party" and pronouncing Cheney incorrectly (yes, we all know you say it the right way but because you keep telling us that, I stubbornly refuse to do it) then you should understand that a label, an identifier, matters. Get it straight: 15% is NOT the far left. They are the "angry left". They are the "whiny left". They are the "never-get-an-orgasm-and-by-god-they're-gonna-take-out-their-blue-balls-out-on-the-world left".

Hell, I'd even add Arianna Huffington to the list of "not the base".

I am far left. I am the base. I am not Jane Hamsher or Adam Green.