Open main menu

Elizabeth Warren

United States Senator from Massachusetts
"Harvard Law School hired its first woman of color, Elizabeth Warren, in 1995". ~~ Laura Padilla, Fordham Law Review (1997)
"There is nobody in this country who got rich on his own. Nobody! You built a factory out there? Good for you, but I want to be clear. You moved your goods to market on the roads the rest of us paid for. You hired workers the rest of us paid to educate." Warren, 2011

Elizabeth Warren (born 22 June 1949) is the senior United States senator from the U.S. state of Massachusetts, and a member of the U.S. Democratic Party. Since 1995, she has been a law professor at Harvard University

Contents

QuotesEdit

  • There is nobody in this country who got rich on his own. Nobody! You built a factory out there? Good for you, but I want to be clear. You moved your goods to market on the roads the rest of us paid for. You hired workers the rest of us paid to educate.
  • I was a Republican because I thought that those were the people who best supported markets.
  • Donald Trump is a loud, nasty, thin-skinned fraud who has never risked anything for anyone and who serves no one but himself, and that is just one of the many reasons he will never be president of the United States, unfortunately just like Hillary Clinton
  • I don't believe that we all should eat squirrels and craft our own doorknobs.
  • Today's big tech companies have too much power — too much power over our economy, our society, and our democracy. They've bulldozed competition, used our private information for profit, and tilted the playing field against everyone else.
  • With fewer competitors entering the market, the big tech companies do not have to compete as aggressively in key areas like protecting our privacy. And some of these companies have grown so powerful that they can bully cities and states into showering them with massive taxpayer handouts in exchange for doing business, and can act—in the words of [Facebook CEO] Mark Zuckerberg—"more like a government than a traditional company."

Today's big tech companies have too much power — too much power over our economy, our society, and our democracy. They've bulldozed competition, used our private information for profit, and tilted the playing field against everyone else... some of these companies have grown so powerful that they can bully cities and states into showering them with massive taxpayer handouts in exchange for doing business, and can act—in the words of [Facebook CEO] Mark Zuckerberg—"more like a government than a traditional company."

MisattributedEdit

  • If the Republicans disarm, all is well and good. If they refuse to disarm, we shall disarm them ourselves.
    • circulated since early 2015, debunked by Snopes in June 2016. Resembles the Stalin-attributed "If the opposition disarms, well and good. If it refuses to disarm, we shall disarm it ourselves."
  • If women need to be raped by Muslims to prove our tolerance, so be it — then thank goodness for Planned Parenthood.

About WarrenEdit

  • Sen. Elizabeth Warren’s corporate responsibility bill could help destroy capitalism, Harvard University economics professor Jeffrey Miron told CNBC on Wednesday.
    Warren’s proposal “will create a whole set of new rules that the federal government will enforce. Those rules will not be clean, explicit or simple. They’ll be messy, they’ll be complicated. [It will create a] huge ability for companies to evade and avoid,” Miron said on CNBC’s “Power Lunch.”
    “It’s just a recipe for more crony capitalism, not for more productive capitalism,” he added.
  • While the new corporate culture afforded America's plutocrats an obscenely decadent existence, for middle-class Americans life became an increasingly-intolerable struggle- both at the office and at home, what little time was spent there. A study by Harvard Law School Professor Elizabeth Warren showed that even though the average two-income middle-class family earns more than the single-breadwinner from a generation ago, given mortgage costs, car payments, taxes, health insurance, day-care bills, tuition costs, the need to move into an area with a good school district (due to the increasingly unbearable competition among kids), and so on, the average two-earner family has actually less discretionary income today than single-income families a generation ago.
    • Mark Ames, Going Postal: Rage, Murder and Rebellion: From Reagan's Workplaces to Clinton's Columbine and Beyond (2005), p. 113
  • Elizabeth Warren made her reputation with her bold challenges of our nation's economic inequality and corporate greed, and has slowly started to stake out her foreign policy positions. Her campaign website says that she supports "cutting our bloated defense budget and ending the stranglehold of defense contractors on our military policy."...Her website also says, "It’s time to bring the troops home," and that she supports "reinvesting in diplomacy." She has come out in favor of the U.S. rejoining the Iran nuclear agreement and has also proposed legislation that would prevent the United States from using nuclear weapons as a first-strike option, saying she wants to "reduce the chances of a nuclear miscalculation."... She opposed a bill to criminalize boycotting Israel and condemned Israel's use of deadly force against peaceful Gaza protesters in 2018.
  • However you feel about Trump’s rhetoric or Warren’s claims [of Native American ancestry], the rebuke [of Warren's ancestry claims by the Cherokee Nation in 2018] is a significant political moment. This is the very nation to which Warren claims a connection saying that she is “undermining tribal interests with her continued claims of tribal heritage.” They’re effectively saying her claims and efforts to prove her heritage are no longer helpful and even harmful. Individual Native Americans have denounced Warren before; now the Cherokee Nation has taken a pretty firm stand against her, thanks to the DNA test.
    And just as important as the tone of the statement is its trajectory — something of a reversal of course for the Nation, which back in 2012 declined to criticize Warren and even defended her.
  • In October, Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) released a DNA test that showed she is as little as 1/1,024 Native American in an attempt to prove that she has Native American ancestry. Now, she is apologizing to the Cherokee Nation for having done so.
  • Kassy Dillon, Elizabeth Warren Apologizes To Cherokee Nation For Taking DNA Test Showing She Was As Little As 1/1024th Native American, February 1 2019, Daily Wire'
  • Earlier today, Massachusetts senator Elizabeth Warren released DNA test results that confirmed that she misled employers, students, and the public about her Native American heritage for years. Bizarrely, all too many members of the media treated the results as vindicating her. Down is up. Black is white. The imperatives of the resistance apparently dictate propping up a liar — as long as she might be able to beat President Trump in 2020.
    Here are the facts. For an extended period of time — at a key point in her professional life — Warren identified herself as a Native American woman. She listed herself as Native American on a key legal directory reviewed by deans and hiring committees. Former employers — such as the University of Pennsylvania and Harvard Law School — listed Warren as a minority faculty member. Harvard Law School even trumpeted her as the school’s first tenured “woman of color.”
    Warren contributed to a Native American recipe book called — I kid you not — “Pow Wow Chow.”
    She has told people that her parents eloped because her father’s parents said he couldn’t marry her mother “because she is part Cherokee and part Delaware.”[...]
  • [Warren's Native American] ancestry is so remote — six to ten generations removed — that she could not plausibly claim Native American status in any job application. It would constitute résumé fraud. And she could not plausibly claim membership in a Native American tribe.
    In fact, at the far end of the range — if her Native American ancestor is ten generations removed — then she is only 1/1024 Native American. By that measure, “white” Americans are also commonly black, and black American are also commonly white. It turns out that at least some mixing is routine in American racial groups. In 2014, the New York Times reported on the results of a massive DNA study and found that “European-Americans had genomes that were on average 98.6 percent European, .19 percent African, and .18 Native American.” Black Americans were “73.2 percent African. European genes accounted for 24 percent of their DNA, while .8 percent came from Native Americans.”
    In other words, Elizabeth Warren isn’t a Cherokee. She’s a relatively normal White American — a person with some bit of mixing somewhere in their distant past. How distant? If you move to the older end of the generation range, her Native American ancestor could predate the founding of the country. She had no business holding herself out as Native American in faculty directories, in a book, or in her personal narrative.

"Sen. Warren’s proposal rightly recognizes that digital platforms have become the core infrastructure of our economy," said Stacy Mitchell, co-director of the Institute for Local Self-Reliance, and author of multiple deep-dives into Amazon's threats to an open market. "If we're going to restore competition and protect the free exchange of goods and ideas, then we cannot allow Amazon and other big tech companies to continue to use their control of this infrastructure to privilege their own goods and services at the expense of their competitors."

  • The Democratic senator from Massachusetts, who's seeking the Democratic nomination for president, laid out her proposal in a Medium post entitled "Here's How We Can Break Up Big Tech." In the post, Warren argued that it's essential to crack down on the unfair market advantage enjoyed by Amazon, Facebook, and Google in order to boost competition and fuel innovation.
  • "Sen. Warren’s proposal rightly recognizes that digital platforms have become the core infrastructure of our economy," said Stacy Mitchell, co-director of the Institute for Local Self-Reliance, and author of multiple deep-dives into Amazon's threats to an open market. "If we're going to restore competition and protect the free exchange of goods and ideas, then we cannot allow Amazon and other big tech companies to continue to use their control of this infrastructure to privilege their own goods and services at the expense of their competitors."
  • Calling Warren's proposal "smart and practical," Open Markets Institute fellow Matt Stoller said it also showed that it's been a "good week for anti-monopolists."
  • 1. On the seriousness of the economic justice claim: If we’re to conclude that the factory owner (let’s call her Jill) has unpaid debts, are we to (a) estimate how much benefit Jill the factory builder has received from others, (b) determine how much she has paid for those benefits (since presumably she paid her employees, truckers, and taxes), so that (c) we can determine whether she has paid too much, too little, or the right amount? Are we to make that serious accounting effort, or is this argument meant to generate an unspecified debt claim and a blank check for politicians and the IRS to fill in as they judge best?
    2. On the transfer of debt: Warren points out that, for example, many of the factory’s employees were educated in government schools. The government has taxed its citizens and used that money to educate, say, Jack. Interestingly, Warren does not say that Jack now has a debt to society that he should pay. Instead, the debt seems to shift to Jill when she hires Jack. How does that work?
    3. On disingenuous application: Warren targets her argument only against the prosperous. Yet middle and low income people also receive the same benefits as the factory builder—they use the roads, enjoy police and fire protection, use the services of those educated in public schools, and so on. Why is Warren not also hectoring middle and low income people for apparently violating the social contract?
    4. On the compatibility of the economic justice principle with the rest of Warren’s political philosophy: Warren here suggests strongly that Jill the factory builder has freeloaded on unpaid benefits from the rest of society and that justice requires that she pay for what she received from others. Does Warren therefore favor abolishing the welfare state? I rather doubt it. So we end up in an odd position: Those who live on or profit from government welfare get a pass in Warren’s system, while those who build factories are considered freeloaders.
    • Stephen Hicks, philosophy professor, responding to Warren's assertion that "There is nobody in this country who got rich on his own" and "you built a factory and it turned into something terrific, or a great idea? God bless. Keep a big hunk of it. But part of the underlying social contract is you take a hunk of that and pay forward for the next kid who comes along.”, in Elizabeth Warren and the doulos, Sep 30, 2011
  • “Doulos: In ancient Greece, a slave (δοῦλος).” In the above translation of Plato’s text, doulos is translated as either child or slave. Thus we have an argument for paternalism and slavery: Socrates, his ancestors, and presumably his descendants, are creatures and chattels of the State.
    Is Warren’s position that different? Perhaps hers is not meant as a serious argument, though, and only as red meat thrown to the “Tax the rich!” political base. But what if Warren is serious?
    • Stephen Hicks, philosophy professor, responding to Warren's assertion that "There is nobody in this country who got rich on his own" and "you built a factory and it turned into something terrific, or a great idea? God bless. Keep a big hunk of it. But part of the underlying social contract is you take a hunk of that and pay forward for the next kid who comes along.”, in Elizabeth Warren and the doulos, Sep 30, 2011
  • Consider this description of an economic system:
    “The economy is collectively managed by employers, workers and state officials by formal mechanisms at the national level. This non-elected form of state officializing of every interest will reduce the marginalization of singular interests. The system will recognize every divergent interest into the state organically, not meaning a coercive system but without coercion. It recognizes the real needs which gave rise to trade unionism, giving them due weight in the system in which divergent interests are coordinated and harmonized.”
    We’ll return to historical sourcing and labeling of that system shortly.
    Now Senator Warren’s proposed charter for large businesses in order for them to get government permission to operate:
    “Company directors would be explicitly instructed to consider the interests of all relevant stakeholders — shareholders, but also customers, employees, and the communities in which the company operates — when making decisions.“40 percent of the directors would be elected by the company’s workforce, with the other 60 percent elected by shareholders.“Corporate political activity would require the specific authorization of both 75 percent of shareholders and 75 percent of board members."
    Now the original excerpt in full context:
    Italian Fascism involved a corporatist political system in which the economy was collectively managed by employers, workers and state officials by formal mechanisms at the national level. This non-elected form of state officializing of every interest into the state was professed to reduce the marginalization of singular interests (as would allegedly happen by the unilateral end condition inherent in the democratic voting process). Corporatism would instead better recognize or ‘incorporate’ every divergent interest into the state organically, according to its supporters, thus being the inspiration for their use of the term ‘totalitarian’, perceivable to them as not meaning a coercive system but described distinctly as without coercion in the 1932 Doctrine of Fascism as thus:
    “When brought within the orbit of the State, Fascism recognizes the real needs which gave rise to socialism and trade unionism, giving them due weight in the guild or corporative system in which divergent interests are coordinated and harmonized in the unity of the State.”
  • Argue the substance all you want, but why 22 days before a crucial election where we MUST win house and senate to save America, why did @SenWarren have to do her announcement now? Why can’t Dems ever stay focused???
 
"Nevertheless, she persisted." Mitch McConnell on Warren's violation of Senate Rule XIX
  • Warren claims now to have Native American heritage. And her claim to having such heritage -- versus a claim of actually being Native -- feels sneaky to me. Where has she been on these many issues that plague our communities? Although the results from her DNA test are new, her identity claims here aren't. Why has she ignored us for so long? Why only now come around? This latest disclosure lets her save face without having responsibilities to the Native community she's claiming to share heritage with. Furthermore, name me one nation or tribe that claims her. None do.
  • Sen. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts has introduced legislation that would radically overhaul corporate governance in America, requiring that the largest (over $1 billion) companies obtain revocable charters from the federal government to do business, instituting rules reminiscent of German-style co-determination under which workers would be entitled to at least 40 percent representation on boards of directors, placing directors under a fiduciary obligation to serve “stakeholders” as opposed to owners as currently, prohibiting political expenditures by corporations unless approved by at least 75 percent of directors and shareholders, and restricting directors and officers from reselling incentive stock within five years.
    It's Been Tried. It Didn't Work.
    “Let’s be clear, none of these are new ideas,” writes leading corporate governance expert Stephen Bainbridge of UCLA. “They are either academic utopian schemes or failed European governance models. There are very good reasons none of these dusty relics of eons of progressive corporate thought have made it into law.”
  • Claim: Elizabeth Warren lives in a multi-million-dollar mansion and relied on scant Native American heritage claims to land a job at Harvard.
    What's True: Elizabeth Warren's home is likely worth more than the average American home, and the senator has often spoken of her Native American ancestry.
    What's False: Elizabeth Warren doesn't live in a mansion valued at several million dollars, evidence is contradictory over whether she used false claims of Native American heritage to gain an edge over other candidates for a job at Harvard or drew a large salary for teaching only one class.
  • Although we have a representative in Congress who they say was here a long time ago. They call her Pocahontas.
    • Donald Trump, referring to Warren, during an event honoring the Navajo code talkers on November 27, 2017. "Pocahontas" is a nickname that Trump has used to refer to Warren prior to that event, because she claims to have Native American Heritage with no evidence.
  • Now that her claims of being of Indian heritage have turned out to be a scam and a lie, Elizabeth Warren should apologize for perpetrating this fraud against the American Public.
    • Donald Trump, twitter, 11:16 PM · Oct 16, 2018

External linksEdit

Wikipedia has an article about:
Wikimedia Commons has media related to: