Battle of the Network Stars (1 Viewer)

[higgins]

Does the OP realize that he's just embarrassing himself?

 

[Hot Diggity Dog]

Granny Warren; defender of the little guy.

 

[Fennis]

You can tell this is a serious poll by referring to her as "Granny".

shes not even a granny.

Do your homework, young man!

The OP called Elizabeth "Betsy" Warren - Granny Warren

 

[timschochet]

I'm honored to have replaced Granny Betsy in the thread title.

 

[Hot Diggity Dog]

Elizabeth Warren; consumer advocate.

 

[Hot Diggity Dog]

Mrs. Warren ; grandmother, mother, daughter.

 

[fantasycurse42]

Is she even from here?

 

[Mr. Ected]

You can tell this is a serious poll by referring to her as "Granny".

shes not even a granny.

Do your homework, young man!

The OP called Elizabeth "Betsy" Warren - Granny Warren

Apologize, it wasn't there when I read it. I assumed you meant HC.

 

[fatguyinalittlecoat]

Is she even from here?

Her people were here before the white man stepped upon these shores.

 

[johnnycakes]

Is she even from here?

earth?

 

[Quez]

The irony in Jeb vs Hillary. I would vote 3rd party guaranteed.

 

[HellToupee]

You still talking about Granny Warren here?

yes

 

[johnnycakes]

You still talking about Granny Warren here?

yes

OK. Found her.

 

[Aerial Assault]

Oh, man - people in this thread are actually regurgitating Scott Brown ads and lines of "attack." Awesome. Meanwhile, these memes are so antiquated that Scott's already "moved" to another state and lost to another woman for a different Senate seat in the interim.

Not sure what this indicates other than the fact that Republicans are pretty dim on their prospects for a successful 2016 White House bid, so it's time to get all skeered about Elizabeth Warren.

 

[DocHolliday]

Every Elizabeth that I met has gone by Elizabeth, Liz, or Beth. I have never met a Betsy. Of course, I am only in my 40s. Maybe my parents know some Betsys.

 

[DCThunder]

I love that statement.

Betsy? Just one of the ole Beverly Hillbillies, right?

Oh, c'mon...

David Herring of Norman, Okla., one of Warrens three brothers, said in an interview that even when he was a child his relatives were reluctant to talk about the familys Native American heritage because it was not popular in my family. Only when he begged his grandparents, said Herring, did they finally explain to him: Your grandfather is part Delaware, a little bitty bit, way back, and your grandmother is part Cherokee. It was not the most popular thing to do in Oklahoma. [indians] were degraded, looked down on.

Warrens brothers, Don, John, and David Herring, also issued a joint statement supporting their sister. The people attacking Betsy and our family dont know much about either. We grew up listening to our mother and grandmother and other relatives talk about our familys Cherokee and Delaware heritage. Theyve passed away now, but theyd be angry if they were around today listening to all this.

A full third of the people I personally know named Elizabeth go by Betsy and I'm 27, liberal, and live in a city. What's weird about Betsy as a name?

this has got to be unless you are in a 65+ crowd

I take it you know this from your extensive interaction with mid-late 20's liberal women?

I know a totally made up statement when I see it

Hint: look at the popularity of Elizabeth as a name for girls from 1980-1990. Those girls had to pick some kind of shorthand and they can't all go by "Liz".

FWIW, my niece, named Elizabeth and born in the late 1980s, goes by Lib. She lives in Brooklyn. She was Libby growing up.

 

[DocHolliday]

C'mon. Anyone remember when the Gores played touch football during the 2000 election crisis and Cheney, Bush, and Powell all walked out (almost strutted with a grass stalk in the mouth) in essentially matching leather jackets up to the fence at Bush's ranch?

Nobody finds this funny?

I find it funny and disgusting. It is funny because too many Americans fall for the act by the politicians.

I like when any of these politicians put on jeans to visit a manufacturing facility. The jeans are always very blue and crisp. It looks so unnatural. I always imagine that all they are thinking about is ditching the jeans as soon as they get back to their limos.

 

[Fennis]

Every Elizabeth that I met has gone by Elizabeth, Liz, or Beth. I have never met a Betsy. Of course, I am only in my 40s. Maybe my parents know some Betsys.

oh snap. I'd hate to be named Betsy right about now.

 

[HellToupee]

Consumer advocate

High cheekbones

 

[rockaction]

Oh, man - people in this thread are actually regurgitating Scott Brown ads and lines of "attack." Awesome. Meanwhile, these memes are so antiquated that Scott's already "moved" to another state and lost to another woman for a different Senate seat in the interim.

Not sure what this indicates other than the fact that Republicans are pretty dim on their prospects for a successful 2016 White House bid, so it's time to get all skeered about Elizabeth Warren.

Nobody is scared of Elizabeth Warren, Aerial. Nobody. This is where we get to have a little fun at her expense, I guess.

By the way, I used to really like her. I thought she was holding the banks accountable. I thought she was trustworthy. I thought, "Hey, she's not my political persuasion, but I could see myself supporting some of her issues and coming to kind of a consensus about at least what was wrong with the current system."

Now, not so much.

 

[Don Quixote]

The irony in Jeb vs Hillary. I would vote 3rd party guaranteed.

Maybe Ross Perot can give it another go and we can replay the 1992 election.

 

[HellToupee]

Oh, man - people in this thread are actually regurgitating Scott Brown ads and lines of "attack." Awesome. Meanwhile, these memes are so antiquated that Scott's already "moved" to another state and lost to another woman for a different Senate seat in the interim.

Not sure what this indicates other than the fact that Republicans are pretty dim on their prospects for a successful 2016 White House bid, so it's time to get all skeered about Elizabeth Warren.

you betcha GB

 

[TobiasFunke]

Oh, man - people in this thread are actually regurgitating Scott Brown ads and lines of "attack." Awesome. Meanwhile, these memes are so antiquated that Scott's already "moved" to another state and lost to another woman for a different Senate seat in the interim.

Not sure what this indicates other than the fact that Republicans are pretty dim on their prospects for a successful 2016 White House bid, so it's time to get all skeered about Elizabeth Warren.

Nobody is scared of Elizabeth Warren, Aerial. Nobody. This is where we get to have a little fun at her expense, I guess.

By the way, I used to really like her. I thought she was holding the banks accountable. I thought she was trustworthy. I thought, "Hey, she's not my political persuasion, but I could see myself supporting some of her issues and coming to kind of a consensus about at least what was wrong with the current system."

Now, not so much.

Yeah, discovering that someone's siblings call them Betsy can really take the wind of your sails.

 

[HellToupee]

The irony in Jeb vs Hillary. I would vote 3rd party guaranteed.

Zero interest in another Bush

 

[Fennis]

Elizabeth Warren

1,696,346

53.7%

Scott Brown

1,458,048

46.2%

 

[rockaction]

Oh, man - people in this thread are actually regurgitating Scott Brown ads and lines of "attack." Awesome. Meanwhile, these memes are so antiquated that Scott's already "moved" to another state and lost to another woman for a different Senate seat in the interim.

Not sure what this indicates other than the fact that Republicans are pretty dim on their prospects for a successful 2016 White House bid, so it's time to get all skeered about Elizabeth Warren.

Nobody is scared of Elizabeth Warren, Aerial. Nobody. This is where we get to have a little fun at her expense, I guess.

By the way, I used to really like her. I thought she was holding the banks accountable. I thought she was trustworthy. I thought, "Hey, she's not my political persuasion, but I could see myself supporting some of her issues and coming to kind of a consensus about at least what was wrong with the current system."

Now, not so much.

Yeah, discovering that someone's siblings call them Betsy can really take the wind of your sails.

It's the trustworthy issue.

I agreed about credit card disclosures.

I'm actually against some forms of predatory lending that aren't clearly spelled out in disclosure and explained.

I am very much against "too big to fail" and bailouts that will never be repaid on the taxpayer dime.

I think certain crooks got away with it, and I don't like it.

I'm a rare libertarian that is for compelled disclosure about certain financial things, which I think has roots in warranties of merchantability, which would be cross-doctrinal and a little weird, but I see the seeds in there.

 

[Fennis]

The irony in Jeb vs Hillary. I would vote 3rd party guaranteed.

Maybe Ross Perot can give it another go and we can replay the 1992 election.

Perot will be playing the Admiral Stockdale role this time

 

[Aerial Assault]

Oh, man - people in this thread are actually regurgitating Scott Brown ads and lines of "attack." Awesome. Meanwhile, these memes are so antiquated that Scott's already "moved" to another state and lost to another woman for a different Senate seat in the interim.

Not sure what this indicates other than the fact that Republicans are pretty dim on their prospects for a successful 2016 White House bid, so it's time to get all skeered about Elizabeth Warren.

Nobody is scared of Elizabeth Warren, Aerial. Nobody. This is where we get to have a little fun at her expense, I guess.

By the way, I used to really like her. I thought she was holding the banks accountable. I thought she was trustworthy. I thought, "Hey, she's not my political persuasion, but I could see myself supporting some of her issues and coming to kind of a consensus about at least what was wrong with the current system."

Now, not so much.

Yeah, discovering that someone's siblings call them Betsy can really take the wind of your sails.

It's the trustworthy issue.

I agreed about credit card disclosures.

I'm actually against some forms of predatory lending that aren't clearly spelled out in disclosure and explained.

I am very much against "too big to fail" and bailouts that will never be repaid on the taxpayer dime.

I think certain crooks got away with it, and I don't like it.

I'm a rare libertarian that is for compelled disclosure about certain financial things, which I think has roots in warranties of merchantability, which would be cross-doctrinal and a little weird, but I see the seeds in there.

Sorry - how did Warren fail in your mind?

 

[HellToupee]

The irony in Jeb vs Hillary. I would vote 3rd party guaranteed.

Maybe Ross Perot can give it another go and we can replay the 1992 election.

Perot will be playing the Admiral Stockdale role this time

Good posting .Actually felt bad for the guy after the initial laugh

 

[IvanKaramazov]

You know its coming. The do-gooder elites are shining up Warren while ignoring she has lied her way through life. I think they'll snub Clinton to burn the party down with Warren

She lied about being Native American, and only a fool would that that that didn't benefit her academic career at least a little.

 

[rockaction]

Oh, man - people in this thread are actually regurgitating Scott Brown ads and lines of "attack." Awesome. Meanwhile, these memes are so antiquated that Scott's already "moved" to another state and lost to another woman for a different Senate seat in the interim.

Not sure what this indicates other than the fact that Republicans are pretty dim on their prospects for a successful 2016 White House bid, so it's time to get all skeered about Elizabeth Warren.

Nobody is scared of Elizabeth Warren, Aerial. Nobody. This is where we get to have a little fun at her expense, I guess.

By the way, I used to really like her. I thought she was holding the banks accountable. I thought she was trustworthy. I thought, "Hey, she's not my political persuasion, but I could see myself supporting some of her issues and coming to kind of a consensus about at least what was wrong with the current system."

Now, not so much.

Yeah, discovering that someone's siblings call them Betsy can really take the wind of your sails.

It's the trustworthy issue.

I agreed about credit card disclosures.

I'm actually against some forms of predatory lending that aren't clearly spelled out in disclosure and explained.

I am very much against "too big to fail" and bailouts that will never be repaid on the taxpayer dime.

I think certain crooks got away with it, and I don't like it.

I'm a rare libertarian that is for compelled disclosure about certain financial things, which I think has roots in warranties of merchantability, which would be cross-doctrinal and a little weird, but I see the seeds in there.

Sorry - how did Warren fail in your mind?

Her failure was her trustworthiness.

If we could leave it at disclosure and prosecuting banksters, that'd be fine. But it sounds like she'd want disclosure to become something else. I don't trust her. I think I could work with her and support her on disclosure and leave it alone, but I couldn't vote for her. I think she'd constantly enact other things, addenda, you name it. Things that would move her proposals ever-leftward.

If she wants to limit herself on certain issues and leave it at that, I'm with her. If she wants to go after both the banksters and the car companies, I'm with her. But I think we'd radically part on solutions to those things. I can imagine her wanting them to be run like public utilities, whereas I'd want them to not exist anymore.

Stuff like that.

 

[timschochet]

Heavens to Be-

Never mind.

 

[Aerial Assault]

Oh, man - people in this thread are actually regurgitating Scott Brown ads and lines of "attack." Awesome. Meanwhile, these memes are so antiquated that Scott's already "moved" to another state and lost to another woman for a different Senate seat in the interim.

Not sure what this indicates other than the fact that Republicans are pretty dim on their prospects for a successful 2016 White House bid, so it's time to get all skeered about Elizabeth Warren.

Nobody is scared of Elizabeth Warren, Aerial. Nobody. This is where we get to have a little fun at her expense, I guess.

By the way, I used to really like her. I thought she was holding the banks accountable. I thought she was trustworthy. I thought, "Hey, she's not my political persuasion, but I could see myself supporting some of her issues and coming to kind of a consensus about at least what was wrong with the current system."

Now, not so much.

Yeah, discovering that someone's siblings call them Betsy can really take the wind of your sails.

It's the trustworthy issue.

I agreed about credit card disclosures.

I'm actually against some forms of predatory lending that aren't clearly spelled out in disclosure and explained.

I am very much against "too big to fail" and bailouts that will never be repaid on the taxpayer dime.

I think certain crooks got away with it, and I don't like it.

I'm a rare libertarian that is for compelled disclosure about certain financial things, which I think has roots in warranties of merchantability, which would be cross-doctrinal and a little weird, but I see the seeds in there.

Sorry - how did Warren fail in your mind?

Her failure was her trustworthiness.

If we could leave it at disclosure and prosecuting banksters, that'd be fine. But it sounds like she'd want disclosure to become something else. I don't trust her. I think I could work with her and support her on disclosure and leave it alone, but I couldn't vote for her. I think she'd constantly enact other things, addenda, you name it. Things that would move her proposals ever-leftward.

If she wants to limit herself on certain issues and leave it at that, I'm with her. If she wants to go after both the banksters and the car companies, I'm with her. But I think we'd radically part on solutions to those things. I can imagine her wanting them to be run like public utilities, whereas I'd want them to not exist anymore.

Stuff like that.

Okay.

Sorry, I'm still not getting it. At one time you trusted her, and now you don't - is that right? If so, I'm just asking: how did she betray your trust?

 

[HellToupee]

Oh, man - people in this thread are actually regurgitating Scott Brown ads and lines of "attack." Awesome. Meanwhile, these memes are so antiquated that Scott's already "moved" to another state and lost to another woman for a different Senate seat in the interim.

Not sure what this indicates other than the fact that Republicans are pretty dim on their prospects for a successful 2016 White House bid, so it's time to get all skeered about Elizabeth Warren.

Nobody is scared of Elizabeth Warren, Aerial. Nobody. This is where we get to have a little fun at her expense, I guess.

By the way, I used to really like her. I thought she was holding the banks accountable. I thought she was trustworthy. I thought, "Hey, she's not my political persuasion, but I could see myself supporting some of her issues and coming to kind of a consensus about at least what was wrong with the current system."

Now, not so much.

Yeah, discovering that someone's siblings call them Betsy can really take the wind of your sails.

It's the trustworthy issue.

I agreed about credit card disclosures.

I'm actually against some forms of predatory lending that aren't clearly spelled out in disclosure and explained.

I am very much against "too big to fail" and bailouts that will never be repaid on the taxpayer dime.

I think certain crooks got away with it, and I don't like it.

I'm a rare libertarian that is for compelled disclosure about certain financial things, which I think has roots in warranties of merchantability, which would be cross-doctrinal and a little weird, but I see the seeds in there.

Sorry - how did Warren fail in your mind?

Her failure was her trustworthiness.

If we could leave it at disclosure and prosecuting banksters, that'd be fine. But it sounds like she'd want disclosure to become something else. I don't trust her. I think I could work with her and support her on disclosure and leave it alone, but I couldn't vote for her. I think she'd constantly enact other things, addenda, you name it. Things that would move her proposals ever-leftward.

If she wants to limit herself on certain issues and leave it at that, I'm with her. If she wants to go after both the banksters and the car companies, I'm with her. But I think we'd radically part on solutions to those things. I can imagine her wanting them to be run like public utilities, whereas I'd want them to not exist anymore.

Stuff like that.

Okay.

Sorry, I'm still not getting it. At one time you trusted her, and now you don't - is that right? If so, I'm just asking: how did she betray your trust?

Not speaking for RA but if I may . A little of Warren goes a long way. The soundbites are great , going after bankers , on the side of college students etc. But when you start digging you see the hypocrisy

 

[HellToupee]

Heavens to Be-

Never mind.

handing out my daily allotment of likes early today

 

[rockaction]

Oh, man - people in this thread are actually regurgitating Scott Brown ads and lines of "attack." Awesome. Meanwhile, these memes are so antiquated that Scott's already "moved" to another state and lost to another woman for a different Senate seat in the interim.

Not sure what this indicates other than the fact that Republicans are pretty dim on their prospects for a successful 2016 White House bid, so it's time to get all skeered about Elizabeth Warren.

Nobody is scared of Elizabeth Warren, Aerial. Nobody. This is where we get to have a little fun at her expense, I guess.

By the way, I used to really like her. I thought she was holding the banks accountable. I thought she was trustworthy. I thought, "Hey, she's not my political persuasion, but I could see myself supporting some of her issues and coming to kind of a consensus about at least what was wrong with the current system."

Now, not so much.

Yeah, discovering that someone's siblings call them Betsy can really take the wind of your sails.

It's the trustworthy issue.

I agreed about credit card disclosures.

I'm actually against some forms of predatory lending that aren't clearly spelled out in disclosure and explained.

I am very much against "too big to fail" and bailouts that will never be repaid on the taxpayer dime.

I think certain crooks got away with it, and I don't like it.

I'm a rare libertarian that is for compelled disclosure about certain financial things, which I think has roots in warranties of merchantability, which would be cross-doctrinal and a little weird, but I see the seeds in there.

Sorry - how did Warren fail in your mind?

Her failure was her trustworthiness.

If we could leave it at disclosure and prosecuting banksters, that'd be fine. But it sounds like she'd want disclosure to become something else. I don't trust her. I think I could work with her and support her on disclosure and leave it alone, but I couldn't vote for her. I think she'd constantly enact other things, addenda, you name it. Things that would move her proposals ever-leftward.

If she wants to limit herself on certain issues and leave it at that, I'm with her. If she wants to go after both the banksters and the car companies, I'm with her. But I think we'd radically part on solutions to those things. I can imagine her wanting them to be run like public utilities, whereas I'd want them to not exist anymore.

Stuff like that.

Okay.

Sorry, I'm still not getting it. At one time you trusted her, and now you don't - is that right? If so, I'm just asking: how did she betray your trust?

Sure, lying about one's heritage to get ahead is just something I can't be charitable about. Especially if that lying allowed one to have financial advantages that other people didn't. If her parents lied to her, then I'm okay with that. I did indeed date a girlfriend from Kansas who looked absolutely nothing like a Native American but whose parents had told her the same thing. So...blond hair, blue eyes, Cherokee? But she indeed was, and had pictures of relatives to prove it, so my own experience with that casts a bit of doubt about that story and that statement.

I also have a weird thing where if you argue for higher tax rates against the rich, and you pull her kind of salary, you can write a check to the Treasury in any amount you deem appropriate (yes, it's ridiculous. Yes, it's also putting your money where your mouth is.) Also, you should generally stay away from industries that are engaging in practices you vehemently disagree with. I do so in my own personal life.

Well, and HellToupee answered much more succinctly than I did.

I'm still willing to meet her on prosecuting banker criminals and financial disclosures so that financial products are more easily understood. Her "28 pages for a credit card?" is indeed a memorable and accurate soundbite.

 

[jonboltz]

Every Elizabeth that I met has gone by Elizabeth, Liz, or Beth. I have never met a Betsy. Of course, I am only in my 40s. Maybe my parents know some Betsys.

Wife's best friend is a Betsy. They are both 39.

 

[timschochet]

My main problem with Warren is that she's a populist. Conservative populists like to demonize the government. Liberal populists like Warren like to demonize big business, banks corporations. In both cases the rhetoric is similar: the "little guy" is surrounded by dark and evil malevolent forces who secretly (or not so secretly) control things . No evidence beyond ominous anecdotes are ever presented. The usual cause for most calamities, which is that somebody inadvertently screwed up bigtime, is always rejected.

I used to like Warren. She was a frequent guests on Maher and other shows and I found her bright, witty and charming. But from the moment she ran for Senator her "us against the big guys!" talk became so repetitive that it began to sound like Bill O'Reilly - an O Reilly of the left.

 

[rockaction]

My main problem with Warren is that she's a populist. Conservative populists like to demonize the government. Liberal populists like Warren like to demonize big business, banks corporations. In both cases the rhetoric is similar: the "little guy" is surrounded by dark and evil malevolent forces who secretly (or not so secretly) control things . No evidence beyond ominous anecdotes are ever presented. The usual cause for most calamities, which is that somebody inadvertently screwed up bigtime, is always rejected.

I used to like Warren. She was a frequent guests on Maher and other shows and I found her bright, witty and charming. But from the moment she ran for Senator her "us against the big guys!" talk became so repetitive that it began to sound like Bill O'Reilly - an O Reilly of the left.

Or we could call it greed in the bank instance.

 

[HellToupee]

My main problem with Warren is that she's a populist. Conservative populists like to demonize the government. Liberal populists like Warren like to demonize big business, banks corporations. In both cases the rhetoric is similar: the "little guy" is surrounded by dark and evil malevolent forces who secretly (or not so secretly) control things . No evidence beyond ominous anecdotes are ever presented. The usual cause for most calamities, which is that somebody inadvertently screwed up bigtime, is always rejected.

I used to like Warren. She was a frequent guests on Maher and other shows and I found her bright, witty and charming. But from the moment she ran for Senator her "us against the big guys!" talk became so repetitive that it began to sound like Bill O'Reilly - an O Reilly of the left.

A little goes a long way with her. The idea of her is great , the execution is very poor when she is left to her own devices

 

[timschochet]

My main problem with Warren is that she's a populist. Conservative populists like to demonize the government. Liberal populists like Warren like to demonize big business, banks corporations. In both cases the rhetoric is similar: the "little guy" is surrounded by dark and evil malevolent forces who secretly (or not so secretly) control things . No evidence beyond ominous anecdotes are ever presented. The usual cause for most calamities, which is that somebody inadvertently screwed up bigtime, is always rejected.

I used to like Warren. She was a frequent guests on Maher and other shows and I found her bright, witty and charming. But from the moment she ran for Senator her "us against the big guys!" talk became so repetitive that it began to sound like Bill O'Reilly - an O Reilly of the left.

Or we could call it greed in the bank instance.

no we really can't. All businesses are out to maximize profits. They will do whatever is legal in their field to do so. They have to ; they have quarterly figures to satisfy ,investors to please , employees to keep and hire. None of this is greed.

 

[rockaction]

My main problem with Warren is that she's a populist. Conservative populists like to demonize the government. Liberal populists like Warren like to demonize big business, banks corporations. In both cases the rhetoric is similar: the "little guy" is surrounded by dark and evil malevolent forces who secretly (or not so secretly) control things . No evidence beyond ominous anecdotes are ever presented. The usual cause for most calamities, which is that somebody inadvertently screwed up bigtime, is always rejected.

I used to like Warren. She was a frequent guests on Maher and other shows and I found her bright, witty and charming. But from the moment she ran for Senator her "us against the big guys!" talk became so repetitive that it began to sound like Bill O'Reilly - an O Reilly of the left.

Or we could call it greed in the bank instance.

no we really can't. All businesses are out to maximize profits. They will do whatever is legal in their field to do so. They have to ; they have quarterly figures to satisfy ,investors to please , employees to keep and hire. None of this is greed.

The reporting from many quarters about how the banks and car companies' employees (just so I include the left and right here) felt entitled to bailouts after massive failures (and their dismissiveness of the American people and taxpayer pocketbooks afterwards) was so appalling, this non-populist had a very, very populist moment that hasn't gone away.

It was entitlement and greed, for both industries.

 

[urbanhack]

Oh, man - people in this thread are actually regurgitating Scott Brown ads and lines of "attack." Awesome. Meanwhile, these memes are so antiquated that Scott's already "moved" to another state and lost to another woman for a different Senate seat in the interim.

Not sure what this indicates other than the fact that Republicans are pretty dim on their prospects for a successful 2016 White House bid, so it's time to get all skeered about Elizabeth Warren.

Nobody is scared of Elizabeth Warren, Aerial. Nobody. This is where we get to have a little fun at her expense, I guess.

By the way, I used to really like her. I thought she was holding the banks accountable. I thought she was trustworthy. I thought, "Hey, she's not my political persuasion, but I could see myself supporting some of her issues and coming to kind of a consensus about at least what was wrong with the current system."

Now, not so much.

Yeah, discovering that someone's siblings call them Betsy can really take the wind of your sails.

It's the trustworthy issue.

I agreed about credit card disclosures.

I'm actually against some forms of predatory lending that aren't clearly spelled out in disclosure and explained.

I am very much against "too big to fail" and bailouts that will never be repaid on the taxpayer dime.

I think certain crooks got away with it, and I don't like it.

I'm a rare libertarian that is for compelled disclosure about certain financial things, which I think has roots in warranties of merchantability, which would be cross-doctrinal and a little weird, but I see the seeds in there.

Sorry - how did Warren fail in your mind?

Her failure was her trustworthiness.

If we could leave it at disclosure and prosecuting banksters, that'd be fine. But it sounds like she'd want disclosure to become something else. I don't trust her. I think I could work with her and support her on disclosure and leave it alone, but I couldn't vote for her. I think she'd constantly enact other things, addenda, you name it. Things that would move her proposals ever-leftward.

If she wants to limit herself on certain issues and leave it at that, I'm with her. If she wants to go after both the banksters and the car companies, I'm with her. But I think we'd radically part on solutions to those things. I can imagine her wanting them to be run like public utilities, whereas I'd want them to not exist anymore.

Stuff like that.

Okay.

Sorry, I'm still not getting it. At one time you trusted her, and now you don't - is that right? If so, I'm just asking: how did she betray your trust?

Not speaking for RA but if I may . A little of Warren goes a long way. The soundbites are great , going after bankers , on the side of college students etc. But when you start digging you see the hypocrisy

So you're not a fan?

 

[Aerial Assault]

Thanks for the response, rockaction. I'm still not sure how familiar you are with what she's accomplished (while being unable to do anything with a Republican-controlled House during her entire tenure), but anyway.

 

[squistion]

Why do you always change thread titles?

It is because he has once again made a horse's patootie out of himself in the OP and this is a pathetic attempt to save face. I don't why the mods keep allowing him to get away with this bait-and-switch on thread titles/subject matter. I would think this should merit some sort of time out, but I don't run things around here.

 

[johnnycakes]

Why do you always change thread titles?

It is because he has once again made a horse's patootie out of himself in the OP and this is a pathetic attempt to save face. I don't why the mods keep allowing him to get away with this bait-and-switch on thread titles/subject matter. I would think this should merit some sort of time out, but I don't run things around here.

On the other hand, DD's use of it during the hockey playoff & stanley cup season makes a good argument in favor of being able to change thread titles.

 

[rockaction]

If I also may say something, for tim's benefit: In my opinion, anti-populism often runs the risk of being monarchical or too distant from the people. It's like Bagehot or Burke. (Or now, Gruber or Mankiw). Too much.

Populism runs the risk of mobocratic impulses. Think de Tocqueville's concern about lockstep public opinion, opinion that drowns out true independent thought.

But fake populism, as you point out, runs the risk of the most cynical and tyrannical impulses. This is where I think people are having trouble with Warren. Right now, she is this: A rich progressive who lied about her heritage and has used Michael Moore, Jon Stewart, and an easy state for a Senate run as her long way to the top (if she wants to rock n' roll).

 

[squistion]

Why do you always change thread titles?

It is because he has once again made a horse's patootie out of himself in the OP and this is a pathetic attempt to save face. I don't why the mods keep allowing him to get away with this bait-and-switch on thread titles/subject matter. I would think this should merit some sort of time out, but I don't run things around here.

On the other hand, DD's use of it during the hockey playoff & stanley cup season makes a good argument in favor of being able to change thread titles.

Thread titles should be allowed to be changed, but not for the purpose of the OP avoiding ridicule when the result is just confusing people and wasting their time. I think most were aware that they were posting in a thread that started out and remained about hockey playoffs and stanley cup, while this was about a Hillary/Warren poll which is no longer the case

 

[timschochet]

If I also may say something, for tim's benefit: In my opinion, anti-populism often runs the risk of being monarchical or too distant from the people. It's like Bagehot or Burke. (Or now, Gruber or Mankiw). Too much.

Populism runs the risk of mobocratic impulses. Think de Tocqueville's concern about lockstep public opinion, opinion that drowns out true independent thought.

But fake populism, as you point out, runs the risk of the most cynical and tyrannical impulses. This is where I think people are having trouble with Warren. Right now, she is this: A rich progressive who lied about her heritage and has used Michael Moore, Jon Stewart, and an easy state for a Senate run as her long way to the top (if she wants to rock n' roll).

See the hypocrisy (even if it's there) doesn't matter to me at all. Take Al Gore- either he's right in his arguments about global warming or he's wrong. (Or he's mostly right or mostly wrong, etc.) But for years conservatives have been taking potshots at him or at Barbra Streisand for being hypocrites. Just as liberals ripped many in the Bush administration for being "chickenhawks". I hate all of that stuff. There are very very few consistent people in the world. What matters, at least to me, is whether or not your positions are right or wrong and what you're going to do about them. As far as how you live your personal life, or what you did before, unless it's especially heinous (like murder or rape or theft, etc.) I couldn't give a ####.

Now as to your first point- I get the resentment against elitism. This Gruber guy is only the latest in a long list of "know it all eggheads" that the public loves to target. But not me. I believe in listening to experts in all fields. I have tremendous respect for the Paul Krugmans of the world, and his arrogance has no affect on me whatsoever, though I acknowledge it's certainly there. We don't always have to do what the experts say. But we should always listen to them and respect their views, and not ignore them simply because they express disdain for those who they believe to be not as smart as they are.

 

[cstu]

If I also may say something, for tim's benefit: In my opinion, anti-populism often runs the risk of being monarchical or too distant from the people. It's like Bagehot or Burke. (Or now, Gruber or Mankiw). Too much.

Populism runs the risk of mobocratic impulses. Think de Tocqueville's concern about lockstep public opinion, opinion that drowns out true independent thought.

But fake populism, as you point out, runs the risk of the most cynical and tyrannical impulses. This is where I think people are having trouble with Warren. Right now, she is this: A rich progressive who lied about her heritage and has used Michael Moore, Jon Stewart, and an easy state for a Senate run as her long way to the top (if she wants to rock n' roll).

Warren grew up poor - her dad had a heart attack when she was 12, leaving her mother to take care of four kids and Warren herself to become a waitress.

It's stupid to attack someone's views because they were able to do well for themselves - especially by 'pull yourself up by your bootstraps' Republicans. She's the model of what Republicans dream about but because she has different views she's a cynical, lying populist. You guys are pathetic.