Did Elizabeth Warren just toss her hat in the 2016 ring?

Senator Elizabeth Warren, D-Massachusetts, and her opinions slanted towards Middle Class Americans,

www.cnn.com...

Her opinion may be "unofficially" signaling a run for POTUS in 2016, or maneuvering for VP. Nowhere in the article does she address 2016, but IMO, her statements "on the record" foreshadow a platform, and a strong one at that.

Keep an eye out for signals on foreign policy from her. HRC needs to be checked into the boards by both parties. Let the gloves fly.

www.washingtonpost.com...

She says no...for now.

a reply to: Boscov

Please say YES!

Having a socialist run on the democrat ticket would make anyone else president!

(hoping for a libertarian candidate!)

a reply to: beezzer

Just to be clear for all who read my post, I am not supporting Warren. I will be voting Republican in 2016, across the board, straight ticket...my choice, my right, although not any 'Publican will do. However, I do not under any circumstance want HRC in office, and I hope the Dem ticket holder gets roughed up and thoroughly vetted. Likewise for the GOP. No more worm tongues.

I would be willing to consider Libertarian, but the split amongst Republicans may pave the way for the Dem, so whoever runs on 3rd party needs to run to win.

Isn't she that progressive who lied and ran as a faux-native american indian or something? yeah ... that's the one. Sure ... She gets a double thumbs down.

a reply to: Boscov

I sure as HELL hope so.

In the interview on cnn she said only that we need more women in charge.
You all have a problem with that???

Talk about Sexism!!!! Gha. As if the current system is working? She's talking about campaign finance reform

What she's saying is true, GUYS.

I'm a registered Independent, I don't toe any "party line", and I believe she would be a fine candidate.

Or, sorry (not) - are you all part of the 1% campaign lobbying committee? Oh damn well. Campaign finance reform is needed. NO MORE LOBBYING. Corporations are NOT people, and money is NOT speech.

Incredible.

a reply to: Boscov

And for me, just to be clear, HRC is not even imaginable. No way.

But the fact is that the middle class IS being ripped to shreds. Voting R across the board? Really??
sigh

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
a reply to: Boscov

And for me, just to be clear, HRC is not even imaginable. No way.

But the fact is that the middle class IS being ripped to shreds. Voting R across the board? Really??
sigh

By whom is the middle class being ripped to shreds, Buzzy? You still blaming Bush? Really??

a reply to: BuzzyWigs

She's a progressive.

Which means;
More money for Wall Street
More unemployment
Higher minimum wages, not ACTUAL wages
Bigger government
Less freedoms
More surveillance
More wars
Weakening our military
Pay-offs for unions

Basically, Obama in pink sneakers.

Cherokee Genealogist to Elizabeth Warren - Your Native American Issue Has Not Been Put To Rest
His Quote -

You say your “ancestry” played no roll in your hiring. That is not the only issue. You were listed as a minority in diversity reports. That is an issue. You admit you made the schools aware of your “heritage.” They counted you as a minority in their reports to the federal government when the criteria to list you as such had a two part requirement – you had to have both the ancestry and maintain tribal ties. Something you did or said led the two schools in question to believe you met those requirements despite the fact you didn’t….

You continue to skate around the issue by repeating the same story you heard growing up. You say you didn’t ask for documentation because you were a child. Excuse me, but you were not a child when you started “checking the box”; listing yourself in law directories as a minority; or were counted as a Native American for diversity reports.

You were instead, an adult, 37 years old, and a lawyer, when you professionally “became” Native American. To make matters worse, your mother was still alive. Maybe children don’t ask for documentation, but adult lawyers should….

As of today, you still refuse to release your personnel records from the University of Pennsylvania and Harvard Law School. If there is nothing to hide, why? …

I love that .... "when she professionally became Native American" ... wow .... that nails it.

She also lied about her parents saying they were 'forced to elope' because her mother was native american indian. That lie was debunked. Warren never explained herself properly for this lie -

"Eloped" Elizabeth Warren Parents Married in Religious Ceremony

Other Warren Lies and Screw Ups

Warren’s claim to fame, which made her the darling of proglodytes, is as a champion of the underdog against avaricious corporations. In the debate, Brown cast doubt on this image when he questioned Warren’s decision to represent Travelers Insurance in its 2009 attempt to avoid paying compensation to thousands of workers with asbestos poisoning. Warren insisted that by representing Travelers (“it was an insurance company versus another insurance company” she later explained), she actually helped the poisoned workers by getting Travelers to set up a trust fund, which was better than nothing. The settlement was later negated by the Supreme Court, leaving the victims with nothing.

Less clear is how Warren was aiding the downtrodden when she represented LTV Steel in 1995, when they attempted to renege on health & pension benefits to thousands of retired coal miners.

Warren has also served, in an advisory or litigating capacity, the following clients in their attempts to use Chapter 11 legalities to avoid liabilities for asbestos poisoning: Kaiser Aluminum; Dow Chemical; Johns Manville; National Gypsum; Fuller Austin; Fairchild Aviation; Piper Aircraft; Babcock & Wilcox Company; Pittsburgh Coming Corporation; Owens Coming Corporation; Armstrong World Industries, Inc.; W.R. Grace & Company; G-1 Holdings, Inc.; United States Gypsum Corporation; Federal-Mogul Global, Inc.; North American Refractories Company

Her Bar status was inactive in Texas and yet she claimed it to be active.
She resigned from the New Jersey bar suddenly and without explanation.
She's been practicing law in Massachussetts without a license. She calls it 'dabbling'.

Elizabeth Warren Massachusetts Bar Controversy

In September 2012, it was revealed that despite rendering legal services from her offices in Cambridge, Massachusetts using her law school address since sometime in the mid-1990s, Warren was not licensed to practice law in Massachusetts.[1]

Warren refused to disclose[2] the full extent of her private law practice when asked by The Boston Globe. A list of cases later produced by Warren to The Boston Globe shortly before a Senatorial debate was incomplete.[3]

As of 2002, Warren had at least 10 private legal matters[4] and charged $675 per hour.[5] Research revealed that there were at least 22 court cases in which Warren represented clients from her office in Massachusetts.

Warren listed her Massachusetts office as her “primary practice location” in her registration with the Texas Bar.[6] In an interview with a local radio station, Warren acknowledged that she was not licensed in Massachusetts and stated that the did not practice law in Massachusetts.

The left calls this all a 'distraction'.
I call it smoke ... because there's a fire.

She doesn't have the moxy.

She'll get chopped up in any debate about anything.

She has too many lies racked up already.

She's too much with the "I'm always right" attitude.

But I would love to watch.

a reply to: beezzer

She's a progressive.

Which means;
More money for Wall Street
More unemployment
Higher minimum wages, not ACTUAL wages
Bigger government
Less freedoms
More surveillance
More wars
Weakening our military
Pay-offs for unions - See more at: www.abovetopsecret.com...

I honestly think you are falling for the rhetoric that Limbaugh and Glenn Beck spew...

No - it does NOT mean more money for Wall Street....
or more unemployment....
or more wars....

But, I DO agree that the current system is screwed up beyond belief. I am disgusted with Obama's continuation of the drone program - those policies ARE creating more terrorists...

I just wish that people were willing to be more aware of what "Progressive" really means.
It's like me squawking that "The Tea Party wants this and that!" when it isn't true.

Beez, do you read both sides of the issues???
HRC is a no-go, as far as I'm concerned. Jeb Bush??? PLease. No way. Nononono....

I tend toward "Green Party" - but maintain that I'm an independent Free Thinker, and I think that lobbying and the uber-rich being able to BUY CONGRESS (which they are doing, and have done for decades) is wrong.

a reply to: beezzer

Having a socialist run on the democrat ticket would make anyone else president! - See more at: www.abovetopsecret.com...

LOL. Finger right on the pulse of the Faux News Demographic. Afraid of hypotheticals and words they don't understand. That should garner about 40% popular vote, mostly rural states with less electoral votes. Good luck with that.

On Faux it will be a "revolution in progress" celebration until the day after the election LOL.

EW isn't in the mainstream. An bit of an unknown. The dark state doesn't want any rebels. I presume Hillary is their chosen Dem because she has so many skeletons buried, she can be manipulated easily. We all know what happened to JFK RFK & MLK don't we? That was the last time they will let people into the "front government" not properly vetted by the "executives".

Just to be clear to all that read this comment, I don't give a hoot who anyone on this forum thinks I'm voting for.

a reply to: BuzzyWigs

Nope.

Any candidate that looks to government to solve our current problems is NO GOOD in my book, simply because government CAUSED the problems to begin with.

Get government out of our lives.
Out of our healthcare.
Out of our businesses.

Then we'll talk.

a reply to: BuzzyWigs
Did you see the part of my post where she worked as a lawyer for the big companies like Dow Chemical .. AGAINST the people they poisoned with asbestos? The people got nothing ... except sick and/or dead. The companies got off.

I know sticking up for the little guy is important to you. I saw the thread you started on people being afraid to pay the little guy (forgot the title). This woman puts on the charm that she's for the little guy, but she's 'big company' all the way.

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
HRC is a no-go, as far as I'm concerned. Jeb Bush??? PLease. No way.

I'm starting to think it'll be exactly that .... Clinton vs Bush ... in 2016. Warren is a dipsy doo and the front runner for the Republicans - Christie - has a major problem now. For the record, as much as I can't stand Hillary, I'd rather have her in office then Warren or Obama.

a reply to: FlyersFan

I know sticking up for the little guy is important to you. I saw the thread you started on people being afraid to pay the little guy (forgot the title). This woman puts on the charm that she's for the little guy, but she's 'big company' all the way.

Ugh. Well, if that's the case, it's a clear and present danger...and I guess I ought to do some more homework.

Thanks for the heads-up. Me and my big ignorant mouth thank you.

Never mind then, folks. Back to my corner.
*slinks away*

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
Never mind then, folks. Back to my corner. *slinks away*

Oh my gosh ... that's funny .... no, don't do that.

This woman has a very questionable history when it comes to her law license.
And she's backed the big corporations against the little guys who were poisoned by them.
And she's told oooodles of lies about her heritage - insulting Native Americans.
(something Obama did too ... but that's been discussed elsewhere)

She seems dipsy-doo to me. But you are welcome to a different opinion. that's fine. This isn't an echo chamber.

She is too smart and way above peoples heads, they wont understand what she is saying. She would get my vote.

originally posted by: lotusfoot
She is too smart and way above peoples heads, they wont understand what she is saying. She would get my vote.

Obama v2.0

*barf*

originally posted by: ScientiaFortisDefendit

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
a reply to: Boscov

And for me, just to be clear, HRC is not even imaginable. No way.

But the fact is that the middle class IS being ripped to shreds. Voting R across the board? Really??
sigh

By whom is the middle class being ripped to shreds, Buzzy? You still blaming Bush? Really??

It's rather easy to figure that out. Just look for the people that keep crying for tax cuts for the rich while blocking the middle class and poor getting a wage they can live on. People that vote across the board just because it's Democrat or Republican have no place in the voting booth because they do more harm than good.