The American Spectator : Elizabeth Warren Becomes Obama's Albatross

Print Email

Text Size

Another Perspective

Elizabeth Warren Becomes Obama's Albatross

By Jeffrey Lord on 9.27.11 @ 6:08AM

Rum, Romanism and Rebellion: Entrepreneurs, capitalism are the Irish Catholics of 1884.

(Page 2 of 3)

The result?

In an upset, New York Governor Grover Cleveland went on to become the first Democrat since 1856 -- a full 28 years -- to finally win the presidency from the heirs to the Party of Lincoln. How did he win? By carrying New York by 1,047 out of 1,167,003 votes cast -- with the incensed perceived targets of the slur, New York's Irish Catholics, putting Cleveland over the top. Democrats also managed to shock the political establishment by maintaining control of the U.S. House.

In the aftermath, furious Republicans pointed the finger at the politically inept Burchard for the loss. In the last week of the campaign his words had become a political albatross for both Blaine and Republicans across the land. The no longer anonymous preacher was even ridiculed in a prominent political cartoon, political cartoons the Saturday Night Live or Letterman and Leno monologue of the day. Depicted swathed in bandages for "political burns," Burchard was sitting on a stool labeled the "stool of repentance," his feet in a steaming tub labeled "Rum, Romanism & Rebellion," an open book in his hand. The title of the book: "What I Know About Politics."

Of particular note, of course, is that the words didn't come from Blaine himself. No matter. Even in the pre-electronic media era of 1884 a presidential candidate had to be paying attention. Burchard was a Blaine supporter, and a Presbyterian -- which is to say Protestant -- minister. The clear imputation that a Cleveland victory would benefit drunken Irishmen from the Pope's legions (read: the Pope in those days regularly assailed as the antichrist) was more than enough to light the fuse on what became one of the most explosive blunders in presidential campaign history.

Which brings us to novice candidate, Harvard professor and Obama bureaucrat Elizabeth Warren.

Warren was caught on the campaign trail sounding for all the world like a guileless, fevered Marxist. The peasants, she lectured (peasants defined today as working Americans), actually work for the state. Contrary to what millions of Americans have believed over the centuries, it is not the other way around. All those public employees out there? You, peasant Americans, work for them. Those highways you drive on? The state has deigned to provide them -- and don't you dare -- ever -- to forget this.

Warren's performance was a tour de force of arrogance, elitism, and the socialist mindset. A snarling demand for control combined with contempt bursting forth from an eerily Burchard-like assumption of moral superiority.

The only difference was that instead of a shorthand reporter sent by the political opposition, Warren's rant was captured on an amateur video taken by a presumed supporter who posted it to YouTube. Quickly, in a fashion obviously never intended by its videographer nor grasped by her immediate audience (the latter another eerie similarity to the Burchard outburst, his audience not getting the import of what they had heard either), the rant went viral.

Conservatives, understanding the exact relationship of Warren's message to Obama's sinking polls, pounced with all the glee of someone discovering they had just won the lottery.

Within hours Elizabeth Warren was the featured attraction on Rush Limbaugh's show. Her anti-freedom, anti-entrepreneurial message -- amplified by her triple X-rated status as ex-Obama aide, Harvard professor, and Senate candidate -- was smartly and entertainingly dissected by Limbaugh, the man who is the 21st century version of all those handbills circulated by Democrats in 1884. Millions well beyond the small drawing room of left-wing wine-and-cheese liberals who were her immediate audience learned of Warren as "a parasite who hates her host." And clearly understanding that they were the host.

Mark Levin instantly zeroed in on Warren as displaying the "mind of somebody who embraces totalitarianism," eviscerating her arguments with a palpable, lengthy delight, finally dismissing her as "a nut." She was headlined on Sean Hannity's forum, and on the front page of Glenn Beck's The Blaze / The clip was featured on Fox News. In the Boston Herald her remarks were headlined as "Run of the Mill Demagoguery." And on…and on and on…it went.

Further complicating things for Obama and his party, far left progressives all across the Internet were waxing orgasmic about Warren. Over at Alternet, Warren was cheered for her "progressive street cred" in a fashion that reminded of those who might cheer on Thelma and Louise to step on the gas. Not since Janis Joplin OD'd on heroin has Rolling Stone been this excited. And on it went.

Over at the Huffington Post, the story called national attention to an earlier piece in the Boston Herald revealing Warren had taken $168,000 from a decidedly capitalistic insurance company to fight an asbestos law suit.

All of which only deepened Warren's rapidly hardening image as some sort of academic political boob, a politically foaming zealot totally incapable of grasping the political gift she and her Internet champions were delivering to Republicans across the land. "Look Ma! I hate capitalists! Except when they pay me lots of money! Ain't I somethin'!"

At least Burchard's anti-Irish Catholic supporters, once Burchard had stepped in it, didn't hold torch light parades to underline their mistake.

Page: < 12 3 >

About the Author

Jeffrey Lord is a former Reagan White House political director and author. He writes from Pennsylvania at jlpa1@aol.com.

Letter to the Editor View all comments (101) | Leave a comment

Gary B| 9.27.11 @ 7:02AM

"In the audience, a shorthand reporter hired by the Democrats scribbled the verbatim and quickly departed to deliver Burchard's words to his employers.

"Hearing them, the Chairman of the Democratic National Committee knew immediately what to do. Said the DNC chair to his staff: 'See to it that the statement is in every newspaper in the country by tomorrow.'"

Here's the difference... as quoted above, the Democrats knew exactly what to do with the gift that had been dropped in their lap. The Republicans - the Stupid Party - has no idea what to do with a gift like this. Even when someone smart, like Rush, leads them by the nose toward the finish line, they snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.

They are so stupid it makes me wonder if they're dumb by design.

PaulyD| 9.27.11 @ 5:28PM

Also, Mr. Lord's analogy to the Burchard situation breaks down in another way. Lord points out Burchard made his statement about a week before the election. But the 2012 election is 13 months away. Warren will be forgotten by then.

IzeHavitt| 9.29.11 @ 11:32PM

Her statement could be forgotten. But savvy campaign staffers on the Repub side will find it most useful as ad copy for political commercials aired a few weeks before the election.

Steve| 9.28.11 @ 2:05PM

"they snatch defeat from the jaws of victory" You mean like in the 2010 'shellacking'. Like that??

Joseph| 9.27.11 @ 7:09AM

The word Catholic is in this article. Where is Margie?

Dan Hirsch| 9.27.11 @ 10:49AM

JOSEPH!!!

Ix-nay on the whole argie-May ing-thay, please. Especially, on the whole omanism-Ray eal-day...

Maybe if we are all real,real quiet, she won't notice us over here...

Sssshhh...
DTOM

P.S.
Margie, read it carefully, I said not one solitary bad thing about you. I was just hoping you could enjoy a peaceful day without us getting you all riled up. Now smile, dear! Please. DH

Grzmlyk| 9.27.11 @ 2:34PM

Thou playeth with fire, sir.

Send me $100 right now or I'll tell on you.

Dost thou desireth a plague of fire, brimstone and a whole passel of crazy on this lovely September day?

Joseph| 9.27.11 @ 2:42PM

G-Man
check is in the mail

Grzmlyk| 9.27.11 @ 2:59PM

Just keep 'em coming and we should have no problems vis a vis the "c word."

And when I say "c word," I mean, of course, a certain church that resides in a certain Vatican surrounded by a certain ancient city.

Be vewy vewy quiet when tip-toeing past the Mad Hatter's lair.

I kid because I love.

Joseph| 9.27.11 @ 4:50PM

You are a gem here, G-Man. Of course my plug might get you called a Papist, which I view as a compliment. But if you want me to insult you instead to avoid it, let me know.

grzmlyk| 9.27.11 @ 6:13PM

Yes, just what I need: A Papist smear.

I thought only women got those.

Perhaps you should lash into me with vitriol worthy of a run-of-the-mill liberal - you know, one of those really tolerant ones who can't wait to take a baseball bat to anyone earning a living.

Maybe now's a good time for me to announce that I am a born-again Wiccan.

Yeah, as a religion it's lame, but you meet a lot of lonely, lost women desperate to be noticed.

I'm not an expert on religion, but I'm reminded of the words of that great philosopher, Rodney King: "Can't we all just get along?"

At least we conservatives, who know that the ultimate expression of godless nihilism is not to be a Catholic, but a Democrat?

Joseph| 9.27.11 @ 8:14PM

Mr. Lord states:

"The clear imputation that a Cleveland victory would benefit drunken Irishmen from the Pope's legions (read: the Pope in those days regularly assailed as the antichrist"

Notice he says in those days, 1880. Evidently Mr. Lord has never read the comments here since he thinks nobody says that today!

jd| 9.27.11 @ 4:00PM

I can't believe she hasn't spewed "LIAR" yet in response. Conservative or not, she will condemn anybody who doesn't agree with her version of biblical truth to hell. I rather think reading her responses is hell on earth.

Betina| 9.27.11 @ 7:10AM

Wish I could read the rest of your article but cannot, at this point. Message: THE URL HAS BEEN BROKEN.

davelnaf| 9.27.11 @ 7:40AM

Betina, click on "Print."

Timothy L. Pennell| 9.27.11 @ 7:24AM

I don't understand. How is this Broad, an Albatross for the Boy raised in the Muslim Schools and Mosques of Indonesia? How does Ms. Hitler, do him any damage, when 20 Years in a White Hating/Jew Hating/America Hating 'Church' didn't?
How is Ms. I haven't been with a Man in Years, worse than 2 Unrepentant Domestic Terrorists? Or, the Black Panthers? Or, hanging out with Louis Farrakhan and a PLO Terrorist Recruiter?
If all of the Communists, and Socialists, and Marxists, and Maoists, and White Hating Black Radical Anti-Semites, that he has installed as CZARS, wasn't enough to open people's eyes? What is this tired, old, used up Hag, gonna do?
Obama already has an Albatross.
Its name is: OBAMA.

USSAlabama| 9.27.11 @ 8:24AM

Timothy -- what this " tired, old, used up hag" WILL do that they did not (as much) is run her mouth.

Her mouth is the gift that Biden's couldn't even be.
Or even Jeremiah Wright who at least tried to curb his and is not running for a public office.

I expect more of these gifts from Warren who is crude and inept enough to keep on talkin'.

Westie| 9.29.11 @ 6:08PM

Ah Ms Warren the belle of the Kos Leftist has messed the collective.....followed by the NC Governoress' comment regarding suspending elections. When is Debbie Wasser woman chiming in?

Chicken Little| 9.27.11 @ 9:56AM

The communists are coming! The communists are coming! The communists are coming! The communists are coming! The communists are coming! The communists are coming! The communists are coming! The communists are coming!

God help us all! I'm running around like a chicken with its head . . . Help! Help! God help us all! Save us, Lord, save us!

We're having massive panic attacks here at AmSpec! I'm looking frantically for a paper bag to put over my head to stop my hyperventilating!

EEEEEEEEEEEEEeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee

Timothy L. Pennell| 9.27.11 @ 10:01AM

Apparently, SALON is off line.
I guess if Obama's Base, wants to come here? They're welcome.
Perhaps they'll LEARN something.

Hello Kitty| 9.27.11 @ 10:05AM

You poor thing. If only I could be there to calm you. I'd give you a ten milligram Valium--one every two hours, and the drug would soothe your nerves, Chicken.

You will be in my prayers, Chicken. "Hail Mary, Blessed art thou among women . . ."

Oops! Sorry, Margie, but I'm Roman Catholic. Don't want to offend, but I must offer a prayer to the Blessed Mary on behalf of Chicken.

Queen of the most holy Rosary, in these times of such brazen impiety, manifest thy power with the signs of thine ancient victories, and from thy throne, whence thou dost dispense pardon and graces, mercifully regard the Church of thy Son, His Vicar on earth, and every order of clergy and laity, who are sore oppressed in the mighty conflict. Do thou, who art the powerful vanquisher of all heresies, hasten the hour of mercy, even though the hour of God's justice is every day provoked by the countless sins of men, especially the liberals and communists. For me who am the least of men, kneeling before thee in supplication, do thou obtain the grace I need to live righteously upon earth and to reign among the just in heaven, the while in company with all faithful Christians throughout the world, I salute thee and acclaim thee as Queen of the most holy Rosary.

Queen of the most holy Rosary, pray for us! Deliver us from the communists.

I do hope this helps, Chicken.

Chicken Little| 9.27.11 @ 10:09AM

Thanks, Hello Kitty. You are too kind.

I have just finished reading your prayer, and I feel awash in the blessed peace of Mother Mary the Merciful. A peace that surpasseth all understanding.

May God bless you, Hello Kitty. You're a living saint in my book.

Toto| 9.27.11 @ 10:13AM

Hello Kitty is the sweetest thing on this blog. I thank God for her generosity and kindness.

If others could only emulate her, reading this blog wouldn't be such a nerve-wracking, stomach-churning chore.

Pepe Le Pew| 9.27.11 @ 10:14AM

Hello Kitty is a dear friend of mine, and I can vouch that she is a real sweetie. Kitty, honey, I blow you a kees!

Little LuLu| 9.27.11 @ 10:15AM

She's a cutie and a sweetie.

Trish Travis| 9.27.11 @ 10:18AM

I love Hello Kitty--simply ADORE her!

Tom| 9.27.11 @ 10:20AM

I'm a fan of Hello Kitty myself. I was just wondering--are there any more fans out here in cyberspace. Maybe you would like to do a little tribute to Hello Kitty right here on this blog.

Clant| 9.27.11 @ 10:22AM

Count me in. Anyone know the color of that ribbon Kitty always wears on top of her head. Is it red?

Bubba from Ole Miss| 9.27.11 @ 12:05PM

Not exactly red. More puce, in my opinion.

I'm still wearing leisure suits (remember those from the 70s?) and my favorite is a blend of rayon and the color of puce. It's a knockout!

Ken| 9.27.11 @ 12:07PM

I'm glad to read there's another leisure suit fan on here.

I've got at least a dozen in my closet, and I wear them to church, funerals, semi-formal barbeques and such.

Daniel W. Maultsby III| 9.27.11 @ 12:09PM

Long live the leisure suit!

Oh, oh. I didn't mean for this to sound like a communist slogan.

Sorry

irish19| 9.27.11 @ 12:18PM

Okay, now you're scaring me.

MARGIE| 9.27.11 @ 3:46PM

PAPISTS AND PUNKS AND LIARS, ALL OF YOU!!!!

Grzmlyk| 9.27.11 @ 4:46PM

Now you've gone and done it (see a certain person's comment below).

Let the brouhaha begin. :-)

BTW, I don't have a dog in this hunt. I am an ecumenical wonder, I am.

Dan Hirsch| 9.27.11 @ 10:52AM

No paper bag, you cute silly lil' chicken?

James Carville's wastebasket is not in use, TODAY. Try that!

DTOM

Truth to Power| 9.27.11 @ 11:06AM

This is a better way of dealing with your upcoming butt kicking. The usual whining is so annoying.

Drunken Sailor| 9.27.11 @ 11:23AM

Oh look it sounds just like Alan.

Mimi| 9.27.11 @ 12:24PM

Chicken " Little".....oh you are into the spread the wealth of energetic accomplishers ...We at TAS interest is in Liberty and ownership of what we earn.

Teaghan| 9.27.11 @ 1:21PM

No Chicken Darling, the communists are here.

Grzmlyk| 9.27.11 @ 2:26PM

Uh, Chicken Little, like all progressives, you look backward, not forward.

The communists are already here. And they're running Washington. You ought to know; you're one of them.

Like all liberals, lying is your first line of defense.

The communists - or, to put it more accurately, the Leninists - run this country - which is why Jeffrey Lord is wrong - this particular Leninist, Elizabeth Warren, is no albatross; she's a paragon of liberalism. A drag on the Democrat party? Au contraire! She's a pitch-perfect voice for the false consciousness that is the perpetual motion boondoggle that is the Democrat party. She represents people like "Chicken Little" and all of Chicken Little's fellow travelers.

Elizabeth Warren is a hero to the thousands of Chicken Littles out there who comprise the Democrat rank-and-file. All of whom are yelling, not "the sky is falling," but this:

"We can continue to prop up the nanny state on the backs of taxpayers indefinitely! We can continue to prop up the nanny state on the backs of taxpayers indefinitely! We can continue to prop up the nanny state on the backs of taxpayers indefinitely!"

The sky will fall, Chicken Little. And it won't just land on evil conservatives who believe in free markets and individual responsibility. It'll also land on parasites like you.

I can hardly wait to see the expression on your worthless beak.

jolizoom| 9.27.11 @ 3:51PM

Dyslexic moment--out of the corner of my eye I caught "Democrat rank-and-file" and, given the topic, read it "Chick-fil-a".

Grzmlyk| 9.27.11 @ 4:33PM

I considered using the term "toxic giblets."

That describes your basic Democrat True Believer.

Incidentally, there are four - and only four - kinds of liberals:

The fools: The young and the idealistic, the blind and the wilfully ignorant who really believe that we can live in a world of peace and love and endless free lunches.

The pawns: The saps getting the free lunches who think politicians are doing them a favor by making them dependent on the nanny state's largesse.

The revenge seekers/vandals - those who just can't stand to see anybody succeed, and when somebody does succeed, ache with the hunger of vengeance and lash out with the intent of destroying what others have created.

The crooks: The oligarchy that pulls the strings. Goldman Sachs. George Soros. Warren Buffett. GM. GE. The Mainstream Media. Michael Moore. Hollywood. The Global Warming pushers. Any corporate interest that crawls into bed with Big Government in order to line their own pockets. Those interests that successfully make their greed look like compassion.

Also, any individual that exploits the fools, the pawns and the revenge seekers/vandals in order to profit.

I think that covers 100% of liberals.

irish19| 9.27.11 @ 7:16PM

"toxic giblets."
I like it. It would be a great name for a grunge(y) rock band.

faxmatter| 9.29.11 @ 9:58AM

Good job. I think you nailed it.

James Solbakken| 9.27.11 @ 2:42PM

Communism is here, and everyone is shocked at how costly it is. Communism will end because it cannot pay for its own upkeep. Communism cannot pay its bills, it doesn't bring home the bacon, it doesn't keep bodies and souls together. The more it succeeds the bigger is the spectacle when it crashes.

Grzmlyk| 9.27.11 @ 3:13PM

Communism doesn't even exist in the real world, as far as I can see - it resides only in the platitudes put forth by our governing institutions, in the fevered fantasies of ivory tower fools and in the callow minds of youth that doesn't know any better.

What does exist is communism's real-world avatar, socialism - and how supremely ironic that socialism, which deplores profits, relies solely on profits to exist. Until, of course, it sucks all of the nutrients out of the host organism. Then both the host and the parasite die. It never fails. Socialism is the cancer on the nation state.

But the legions of Chicken Littles don't care about that; as long as they get their government goodies, they're happy. And as long as they vote for the politicians who keep the goodies coming, the politicians are happy.

Liberals love to preen sanctimoniously over how much they "care" about sustainability and not harming the planet.

And yet socialism is more destructive than all the coal plants and all the oil wells and all the chlorofluorocarbons on the planet. It destroys government, business, education, family and the individual will. It leaves nothing but devastation in its wake, eventually claiming even the crooks who profit off of the foolishness of the true believers.

And yet, as savvy as they like to believe they are, they do not see the tragic irony wrought by their vanity and their greed.

WillyP| 9.27.11 @ 10:02AM

Just one more nail in the coffin!

da monk| 9.27.11 @ 7:28PM

Tim: I think all we readers of Spectator have come to the conclusion that you don't like Obama.
Have you anything new to say?

PJINTERROGATOR| 9.27.11 @ 7:40AM

I am not sure the electorate is sophisticated enough to see and comprehend how dangerous Elizabeth Warren and her ideology really is. It used to be called "Bolshevism".

Bill| 9.27.11 @ 7:43AM

Please post the last two pages!

Skippy| 9.27.11 @ 6:27PM

I had no problem.
But I don't know anything about computers.
Might be a blessing!

FastJohnny| 9.27.11 @ 7:47AM

Yes, I am having a problem with the rest of the article not showing up. It is happening with the other front page articles as well. Is this a new 'paywall' or is there a problem with the URL?

Ebenezer| 9.27.11 @ 8:22AM

Good question. But you can read the whole thing by going to "print". Looks like this is the digital version of the situation where in a paper you were sent to page 28 in the B section and it turned out there was no such place. Unless it's a paywall as you suggest but wouldn't they announce it?

FastJohnny| 9.27.11 @ 9:00AM

Yes, it worked when I hit the 'print' button at the top of the article. I couldn't figure out what you all meant by hitting print, I was trying the internet explorer print button,...I am embarrassed that I was slow on the take, sorry about that and thanks.

faxmatter| 9.29.11 @ 10:01AM

You probably just need a Mac ; > ). I'm seeing things just fine.

JP| 9.27.11 @ 7:47AM

Professor Warren created a strawman. The issue isn't whether we want a federal government (the Constitution gives us no option in that regard); it's the proper role of government. Her point would make sense if this was 1923. But, at a time when the federal government consumes some $4 trillion (more if you take into account the massive borrowing against the wages of unborn taxpayers), her point is absurd, if not totally immoral. We are not corvee's of the State - yet.

David W| 9.27.11 @ 9:23AM

I don't believe her point would have made any sense in 1923, since that was before the new deal junk from FDR. Even during the depression I'm not sure if it would have been any better, though I'm sure the socialists in FDR's administration would have agreed.

donserge| 9.27.11 @ 8:44AM

The only surprise to me in all this is why people ARE surprised as to what Warren said. She is running to be a US senator from Mass....the state that elects Barney Frank with 70% of the vote...Lexington (of revolutionary war fame), where Obama got 70% of the vote.....Kerry, Markey, Chappaquidick Kennedy, and the Mass answer to Snowe/Collins, Scott Brown; the list goes on.

Granny Jan| 9.27.11 @ 8:59AM

We don't elect people who look like your high school english teacher.
We don't elect non-catholics with a few exceptions.
We don't elect Harvard profs. only Harvard graduates.
We don't elect outsiders unless they're black.
We don't even elect women.

Brown has a good chance even in MA. She's made me consider contributing to him.

bumpdraft| 9.27.11 @ 7:53PM

You hit the nail on the head. Her comments might be a problem for Obama nationally, but in MA, those comments will get her elected.

Lazy Jack| 9.27.11 @ 9:16AM

This quote and Jan Schakowsky's “I’ll put it this way, you don’t deserve to keep all of it" should be placed in every add by every candidate on a Republican ticket with the tagline, "Authentic Democrats."

Or, better yet: "Jan and Liz, hoping for Harrison Bergeron." I know it is and obscure reference, but bloody appropriate.

Thanks to Jan, Liz, and the DNC for reminding us a poppy should never get too tall.

Lazy Jack

www.thanksforthelaughs.wordpress.com

Granny Jan| 9.27.11 @ 9:49AM

Yes, I could do that: Women of the Democrat party video: Debby, Elizabeth, Jan, Maxine, Nancy, Michelle O, Barbara B. Did I miss anyone? It would be like shooting fish in a barrel. It would bring out my best snarkiness and could be fun.

jolizoom| 9.27.11 @ 3:54PM

I had to look it up, but I've read it! Looooong time ago.

Mary Mayes| 9.28.11 @ 5:00PM

There's also a clip out there of Mrs. Schakowsky admitting to a roomful of constituents that the purpose of Obamacare was indeed to put the insurance companies out of business -- met with wild cheers and applause.

RCM| 9.27.11 @ 9:16AM

Page 1 was interesting, I couldn't get the others, 404 error page no longer available. HMMMM

David | 9.27.11 @ 9:19AM

I suggest checking out why all your links are broken. I think someone has hacked the site!

Shamus| 9.27.11 @ 9:55AM

It's more likely to be a programming error.

Jeffrey Lord| 9.27.11 @ 10:49AM

Shamus and everybody:

Site error now fixed.

Full speed ahead.

Thanks.

donserge| 9.27.11 @ 9:29AM

What Warren is saying is what she believes the electorate wants to hear and judging by who's been elected in Mass, can she be far off the mark?
Getting behind a conservative candidate is what is needed in Mass....Oh, you say, there is none? Exactly my point.

WillyP| 9.27.11 @ 10:09AM

You are right, this is exactly what liberals want to hear. It really highlights the difference in philosophy between them and real people. Even fence sitters, like my wife, don't see what is so wrong with this.

da monk| 9.27.11 @ 7:32PM

Willy: Please tell us who are the "real people"?

Silver Streake| 9.27.11 @ 11:56AM

Not all of us in MA want to hear this crap spewing from the mouth of another Masshole. But, if the quote is used in videos to destroy the DemocRats in 2012, then I'll listen to it all day.

The one part of Warren that many overlook - she was a Harvard law professor. I'd be curious to know exactly what law she was teaching with her communist worldview of capitalism. Maybe she was teaching Cuban or North Korean law?

Isn't great that she is protected by the very document she pees on, the US Constitution.

gearjammer| 9.27.11 @ 9:37AM

So. what came first man and his industry, or the guvmint and taxes ? We know what this moonbat believes-that guvmint is one of the " natural " wonders of the world. But, still, tou gotta admit it would be worse to vote in a Rino like Brown, than have her in the senate. Right ? Right ? Anyone. anyone ? Maybe the loon who ran in Deleware can move to the Bat State, and we can use her to knock off Brown-then we'll really show them. I studued my political science at the esteemed Limbaugh Institute, and was really impressed by Prof. Levin.

A Grin Without a Cat| 9.27.11 @ 10:37AM

I believe AttackWatch.com was a bigger error, and it was committed by King Zero himself.

Redstateboy| 9.27.11 @ 10:40AM

Let's see how smart Scott Walker is or is not... if he and his advisers can't wipe the floor with this Slave Party lunatic - then he deserves to have a short career in the Senate while the people of MA. get the Bananahead They deserve.

Drunken Sailor| 9.27.11 @ 11:27AM

I think you got your Scott's confused. Scott Walker is govenor of Wisconsin. Scott Brown is the Senator from Mass that should be using this info.

Redstateboy| 9.27.11 @ 4:49PM

Great Scott! You're Right!

Who Knows?| 9.27.11 @ 11:06AM

Did Drudge report that Warren is now ahead of Brown in the polls?

Maybe she is tapping into the inner Marxist in a lot of voters in that Minuteman state---for a while.

Skippy| 9.27.11 @ 6:33PM

No big surprise.
Last year California elected every single Democrat that ran for anything.
Just like junkies, they will use until there is no more, then beg for mercy...and just a little bit more...

PattyMor| 9.27.11 @ 11:10AM

Is this really any different than Barack's comments about people who cling to their guns and God with antipathy for anybody who isn't like them? No, theyr'e all the same red fish in the kettle.

The veil has been lifted and socialist is one of the kinder things we could call them. Levin calls them statists; to me they're all totalitarians.

Buck Ofama| 9.28.11 @ 4:01AM

I simply call them dirty rat cocksvckers. What do you think?

Controse| 9.27.11 @ 12:33PM

Great article that educates in the most powerful way possible by drawing strong parallels between what happened before with what has just happened. It is good to raise the subject of albatrosses. Obama, or whoever he is, specializes in hanging albatrosses around his neck and that of the Democrat party. It is just that no one has labeled them as such. Let me name a few of my favorites. The let-them-eat-cake vib broadcast from the golf/vacation/foreign and domestic speaking trip extravagances. The obviously phoney long form birth certificate posted on the White House web site. The teleprompter as punchline. The accelerating disregard for our system of government via wavers, executive orders, and disregard for limits on executive actions placed lawfully by the judiciary. A Justice Department that takes time out from not enforcing the law to actually facilitate the breaking of the law.

Trinacria| 9.27.11 @ 3:50PM

My son came home from school recently and informed us it was his goal to get accepted at Harvard. I promptly informed him that I had thenceforth frozen his college fund account pending the return of his senses.

jolizoom| 9.27.11 @ 4:00PM

Right on! I keep wondering when conservative parents are going to stop paying for their kids to be indoctrinated in socialist schools.

My husband is about to go to Yale--because they need someone with real-world experience to fix their problem. That's the closest any of us will ever get to attending Yale, and that makes me proud! My 12-y-o wants to go to Harding! :)

George S| 9.27.11 @ 4:03PM

Times have changed... the average American circa 1856 was better educated, better read, more economically literate and could critically think better than the average graduate student of today. The Burchard analogy will not have the same effect on today's electorate.

Lucius Severus Pertinax| 9.27.11 @ 4:26PM

The irony here is that if Grover Cleveland were alive today, he would be a Republican!

Pat| 9.27.11 @ 4:38PM

More of an angry Pomeranian than an albatross, the Dems have mobilized Elizabeth Warren, among others, to counter the public’s recent erosion of faith in government, particularly government as practiced by Democrats. The Gallup folks recently reported that Americans’ faith in their government has fallen to an all-time low. And, for the party of Big Government, this news is like a punch in the gut, or even a vicious kick in the crotch.

The mainstream media has gone completely ape over the notion Americans believe less and less in Obama’s more and more style of rule. One sophomoric darling, Catherine Rampell, writing for the New York Times has even revived the “Tinkerbell Effect” to admonish her readers on this subject. “You have to believe in government or the government can’t help us”, she laments. Maybe there can be too much Disney magic while growing up because this sounds suspiciously like “Do you believe in fairies?” from the Peter Pan animated flick. And if you don’t believe in fairies – or rather government – then government will just fade away. So quick, say: “I believe in our government, I do, I do” – or bad things could happen.

Those of us over 12 years old are probably wondering what the heck does believing in government have to do with our government’s ability to govern? Government has the law on its side. And our government has all those hi-tech, anti-personnel weapons on its side to ensure its laws are obeyed. In fact, our government has all the firepower necessary to keep us taxpayers in line and we, the citizens, have nothing to respond with – so now the government demands our heartfelt belief as well?

The Gallup people can take all the opinion polls they want but our individual faith in government isn’t necessary. Sure, Obama’s supporters want to think well of themselves, they want to believe we love them for what they do, as well as for what they are. Becoming wealthy off us taxpayers is no longer adequate compensation, they now require our faith to do their jobs. Couldn’t they remain content with legally robbing us blind without publicly begging to be elected this year’s Prom Queen?

Herb| 9.27.11 @ 9:00PM

I really wish all this back-and-forth was focused on the fanatical ravings of Elizabeth Warren. What's that expression that goes she looks like everybody's first wife, or something. Plenty of ammo there and she probably wants youtube banned.

Anyway, let's not characterize Pomeranians. The one I knew barked only to say, "C'mon, let's play!" Always grinning and feisty, loved tug of war.

Maybe "angry Shar-pei" is more apt.

martin j smith| 9.27.11 @ 5:01PM

There should be an add by whoever is the Republican Nominee with this Warren person talking and Obama's picture gently overshadowing Warren's. And the question: Is this what Americans want ? You must choose in 2012.
US or THEM !!!!!!!!

Bob K.| 9.27.11 @ 7:13PM

Mr Lord,
It is a nice historical vignette but that was another time and it offended a specific voting group.

Today, those who agree with her liberal, socialistic philosophy will not leave her. And those who disagree will still disagree. I believe that those who are employed by these people who own these industries will shrug their shoulders and say that they already knew this and that the people who hired them are entitled to their profits.

But it was a well written and informative article.

POST American| 9.27.11 @ 10:38PM

-----Nice '90's Show' nausea-stalgia and
DIS--traction OP.

NOW, with the Globalist RED China set up
and TREASON OP coming 'round the bend
--and with world DEPOP OPs becoming
a reality as FUKISHIMA fallout saturates
our CHEM-trailed skies---------UH----------
could we pretend we're a jounralist? -n'
make believe we're a fearless commentator?

Those Rock--F--L--O rectal bennies ---really
ain't worth the sacrifice of self-respect.

------------------------REALLY---------------------------

Gary| 9.27.11 @ 10:59PM

Warren is saying what most liberals believe. What we earn is for the State first, which then allows us to keep what it deems necessary. That's why liberals see tax breaks as "giveaways" to the connected since whatever we earn is for the government to begin with. Of course what she ignores is the pesky little fact that EVERY dime the government spends comes from the people and businesses she abhors. Without them there would be no roads, no army, no public utilities, no Congress, and on and on. Even the commies have changed their ways after failure, but hey, she may win in Mass, where such attitudes are the rule.

Buck Ofama| 9.28.11 @ 3:59AM

On a dating site the other day, I got an annoying email from a liberal "intellectual" snob PhD (Piled higher, Deeper). In a most simplistic fashion, the silly bitch proceeded to lecture me on Keynesian economics, Limbaugh, and the Tea Party. So, I was compelled to put the "smart" bunt in her place.

Below is my reply, after which receiving from me, the silly bunt blocked my further email. I read the silly bunt's profile, in which she stated that she is an American living in Costa Rica, a self-proclaimed liberal, a business owner (probably selling candles) and that "when we touch our palms together we will know whether we are in love." Blechhhhh.

Should anyone wish to amuse himself by trifling with the mentally-disordered bunt, you can locate it by username "Alexamazing" at Plentyoffish (a really shitty free site).

Here is most of my reply:
---------------------
I am not a declared member of the tea party.

Please stop with your obviously uninformed paranoia over the tea party, which is not a real political party. Moreover, if you don't live in AmeriKa, why are you so threatened by tea party philosophies?

Since *you* brought it up, perhaps you would now briefly put down your lecture notes, descend from on high, try to be *courageous and honest with yourself* and do 2 minutes of light research and see whether you can find the frightening terms god, abortion, religion, creationism, or evolution here:

http://www.teapartypatriots.org/Mission.aspx

More importantly, see whether you can find the tea party's mission statement. Then honestly ask yourself what's wrong with those concepts.

Clue: the mission statement uses words like "limited government", "fiscal responsibility", and "liberty".

During your exhaustive research- in which you shall attempt to honestly evaluate your fear of tea party principles- ask yourself if, as a supposed business owner, you would be better off running your operation in the US or offshore? Why? Why not?

Finally, white is not your best color. It makes you look even more washed out, pale and sickly. Get off the computer, turn CNN off, go sit in the sun and contemplate your supposed intellectual honesty. You might actually learn something useful.

Your mileage may vary.
---------------------

Citizen Charles Foster Kane| 9.28.11 @ 8:40PM

"We encourage readers to share and discuss their thoughtful and relevant comments about this Spectator article. Comments are routinely monitored and will be deleted if profane, bigoted, or grossly impolite. Please be respectful. (And don't feed the trolls!) Thank you."

Fascinating that calling someone a "silly b****" isn't seen as profane. Kudos on your ability to express yourself in such a thoughtful manner!

lionlaw| 9.28.11 @ 2:10PM

Okay, so a Massachusetts pol is an academic/liberal/progressive/Marxist lite - but hasn't she pulled ahead of Scott Brown in Mass polling - endangering GOP chances in the Senate.

And given she's from Harvard & Mass how much weight is the public really going to her statements? That a Harvard academic is extolling the virtue of big gov't ain't exactly news.

Richard L. Kent, Esq.| 9.28.11 @ 3:16PM

It should be noted also that "Rum, Romanism and Rebellion" is a catchphrase that was very common among the Protestant zealots of Ireland long before it was ever uttered here by the reverend, and Irish Catholics knew this and remembered.

Citizen Charles Foster Kane| 9.28.11 @ 8:37PM

Ah yes. A tortured historical analogy. Why are conservatives the Abu Ghraib of logic? Furthermore, a lot more people recognize the importance of the social contract than cutting corporate tax rates further.

Jay| 9.28.11 @ 11:05PM

You reichtwang weenies are more than a little desperate if this is what you have as a hit-piece 14 months out of a general election, and based on 188os era American media. The only people who interpret Warren's words in this manner is your retard readership, aka Tea Tards.

I guarantee you that no independent moderate, nor any left-winger would interpret the meaning of them as your strawman "[the government] provided the means to bring your goods to market...". We KNOW that it was our construction workers, our laborers and the collective will of hard-working Americans which brought this. We KNOW this is what Warren meant. How are you going to impart us with your own bizarre fundamentalist radical views that everybody to the left of you extremists is part of the big bad evil gubment? You think I am going to start seeing myself as a 'gubment scumbag?'. Ain't gonna happen sh!twits. All of your attempts to compare yourselves to drunken Irishmen of the 1880s will go unnoticed.

Here is what will really happen. Warren's words will be an albatross around YOUR necks. Here is why: They exposed your own views on government, and your bizarre strawman thoughts that everyone left of you, all the way down to the grocery store bagger is fully integrated with government and you expect them to realize it. You think it wont come out in the next 14 months that you tards hate the very employer you are submitting your own applications to work for?

You people are impossibly stupid and confused.

Hollywood Hick| 9.29.11 @ 10:44AM

I agree with you in part. I'm a conservative but I'm not walking away with all of the same conclusions. I went and listened to her content via your link, to try to get some useful context. When she said "nobody got rich on their own", she's right. She mentions, roads, education, the police and draws the correct conclusion that success is impossible without those services: Services paid by the taxpayers. I didn't get the indictment that the Fed "allows" the factory to prevail. But I'm sure one could make that argument under this administration.

What she FAILS to mention is that all the teachers, road workers and police are compensated for those services. Is she saying they are entitled to more? For those of us who aren't educators, road workers, or policemen (read: Unions) who didn't provide services but paid our taxes - how much are WE owed from the factory? How about the person who contributed no services AND paid no taxes? How much is THAT PERSON owed?

Where she is dead wrong is to exclude the enormous contribution the factory makes in quarterly tax payments, transportation taxes, gasoline taxes, salaries and wages, the purchase of raw materials, navigating litigation mine fields, all contributions to the economy which increase fed revenue and far out-weigh her own meager contribution. Where she is further inaccurate is in her assumption that the "social contract" requires the factory to "give away anything more than "a big chunk of it." (Her words). I'm not sure what contract she signed, I'm not sure how big "a big chunk of it" is, but the rest of us haven't even seen a draft of that socialist document.

And I'm pretty sure that if I did sign it, I'd never see a dime. But then again, I didn't earn it.

PolishKnight| 10.4.11 @ 4:21PM

Good point, HH. If we look at government as a service, then it's a fantastic way to illustrate what the tea party has been saying all along: The "guvment" has gotten too big. Education and roads are failing while trillions go to "stimulus" spending and "entitlements". The only REAL "entitlement" are roads, courts, and police. Even education is something that should fall on parents' shoulders. If children need to be educated and the state should provide that, what about housing, food, and transportation? Why not just have the state go totally communist if that's what's necessary to raise children as future taxpayers?

This segways into one of my most controversial observations: The love affair conservatives have with police and the military. Obviously, conservatives respect the sacrifices made by the police and military and the importance of the USA as a beacon of freedom and free markets, but simultaneous, the police and military are still just bureaucrats with guns and public servants. While the military is unable to unionize, the police have done so and this makes them into a force to now be regarded as more of a threat and even nuisance than asset. When you're driving and see a cruiser on the street, do you feel safe or threatened? I don't mean physically, of course, but rather don't you worry you might get busted for a bad taillight or driving over the speed limit which they have conveniently set artificially low precisely to allow them to write their quota of tickets? In the meantime, if you ask them to come by and investigate an incident of vandalism they'll tell you they have better things to do...