Lib Elizabeth Warren Running for Senate in Mass. Against Scott Brown: Former Obama Advisor Grossly Under-reported Her Income, Lectures Businesses to Fork More Money over to Government (video)
Posted By Vicki McClure Davidson on September 27, 2011
Democrat statist Elizabeth Warren is running against Republican Sen. Brown in the upcoming Massachusetts senate race. Believe it or not, this ultra-liberal nutbar is doing well so far with many Massachusetts voters in recent polls — mainly, it seems, because moderate Brown is considered by Massachusetts’ ultra-liberals to be too conservative.
Harvard professor Warren is a former Obama advisor who, it was recently discovered, grossly under-reported her income in 2009.
And yet, she thinks rich people are darned lucky to get to keep any of their money from the government, because the government is just SO fabulous and needs to be BIGGER. No one can make it on their own in America without the Nanny State — no one can be a success without Big Brother Government there to prop us and nurture us, says Warren. Millionaires and billionaires should be grateful, and accordingly, should give more money to the government. Like other statists, socialists, Marxists, and communists, Warren appears to despise free market principles, appears to despise the inherent freedoms granted in the US Constitution, wants the government to have potentially ultimate power, and embraces the redistribution of Americans’ wealth — unless it’s her own.
Anyone surprised by this lunacy and hypocrisy from the Left?
From Gateway Pundit, Oops. Far Left Loon Elizabeth Warren Made $192,722 Not the $64,268 She Declared:
It was an honest mistake.
Far left moonbat Elizabeth Warren made $192,722 during her gig as chairman of a congressional committee in 2009. Her campaign said the government only paid her $64,268.
This is the same socialist crackpot who last was seen on tape lecturing business owners about forking over their profits to their benevolent government.
This YouTube campaign video of Warren is getting plenty of attention. This woman is downright frightening. Massachusetts, listen closely to the video:
Elizabeth Warren’s campaign diatribe:
I hear all this, “You know, well, this is class warfare. This is whatever.” No! 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. You, uh, were safe in your factory because of police forces and fire forces that the rest of us paid for. You didn’t have to worry that marauding bands would come and seize everything at your factory and hire someone to protect against this because of the work the rest of us did.
From Human Events, Unhinged Leftist Elizabeth Warren Fesses Up to Her “Honest Mistake” – How Does an “Honest” Person Overlook $128,433?:
The shrieking moonbat looking to win Scott Brown’s Senate seat in Massachusetts has already been caught lying about how much money she raked in while working on a Congressional Oversight panel monitoring TARP funds. Naturally, her people claim it was simply an honest mistake. Yes, really. We wonder how much benefit of the doubt Lizzie Warren and her merry band of class warriors would afford a Republicans for such a clumsy oversight?
The campaign for Democratic Senate hopeful Elizabeth Warren said Friday she had been paid $192,722 for serving as chairman of a congressional committee that monitored the 2008 federal bank bailout, three times as much as had originally been acknowledged.
[...]Oh, so they were in a hurry or something. But why did they wait to be exposed the other day before taking the time to revise their filing?
Considering Warren and her hard left supporters are all about fairness, Warren should make a noble gesture of donating that newly-discovered money to charity, don’t you think? After all, so many are suffering while wealthy elitists like Warren rake in lavish sums of money for very little work.
Isn’t it time she paid her fair share?
Meanwhile, the reactionary robots of the leftwing fever swamps are lamenting the vicious attacks from the dreaded right-wing smear machine resulting from Lizzie’s viral video where she revealed herself to be to the left of Chairman Mao. Indeed, nothing like smearing someone by playing a video of her speech and taking her words literally.
How unspeakably evil of us!
From The Daily Caller, Poll: Warren narrowly leads Brown in Massachusetts U.S. Senate race:
Democratic Warren — a law professor and attorney — leads Republican Brown 46 percent to 44 percent in a head-to-head match up. Voters also have a more favorable opinion of the Harvard professor, with 40 percent saying they hold a favorable opinion and 22 percent saying they hold an unfavorable opinion. Brown’s job performance gets more mixed reviews, with just 44 percent approving and 45 percent disapproving. However, Brown is far better known than Warren — 38 percent of voters are still not sure what they think of Warren.
Brown’s approval rating has steadily declined since he was first elected as one of the country’s most popular senators. In December of 2010, 53 percent approved and 29 percent disapproved of his job performance. By June of 2011, that split had narrowed to 48 percent approving and 36 percent disapproving. Now it sits at 44-45.
Massachusetts is a very Democratic state, and Brown is a Republican, but a plurality of voters feel that his politics are about right, and that he has served as an independent voice for Massachusetts, rather than a partisan voice for the Republican party.
However, a fair number of voters still find him to be too conservative: Forty-five percent say his politics are about right, but 38 percent say he is too conservative. The Republican Party itself does not poll well in the state, with 56 percent saying it is too conservative. Some of the criticism of Brown likely stems from the fact that 41 percent say that he has been a partisan voice for the GOP, though a greater number — 47 percent — say he has been an independent voice.
Astute analysis of Warren’s wackadoodle economics at Reason.com — here’s a portion of Elizabeth Warren’s Voodoo Economics:
(1) This is a pretty powerful takedown—of a position nobody holds. Or at least nobody outside an Ayn Rand novel. If Warren can find someone who thinks he does not live in community with other people, then she might have an argument. But don’t sit on a hot stove waiting.
(2) For someone who objects to the term , she sure draws a mighty bright line between “you” and “the rest of us.”
(3) The question is not whether a captain of industry should pay taxes—but how much. Reasonable people can debate where to set marginal tax rates. But when the richest fifth of Americans pay 64 percent of federal income taxes while the bottom two-fifths pay less than 3 percent, the case for even greater progressivity is not beyond rational debate.
(4) Outside of a few anarchist collectives, there isn’t a soul around who minds paying taxes for roads, cops, firemen, or schoolteachers. It’s the jillion other things government does—from corporate welfare to the Iraq war—that people object to.
(5) Plenty of smart, well-meaning people also think even government’s core functions could be delivered better and for less—just as the Obama administration has used the Dartmouth Atlas to argue for greater efficiency in medical care. E.g., since 1970 inflation-adjusted per-pupil spending in public K-12 education has doubled. Class size has been cut in half. Neither change has produced any substantial effect on academic performance. Why don’t we have the equivalent of a Dartmouth Atlas for public education?
(6) Warren’s remarks epitomize the caricature of a progressive as someone who loves jobs but hates employers. She implies the captain of industry is simply sponging off society and hoarding the proceeds. But hiring workers is a huge social good. So is providing a funding basis for pensions, which generally rely on stock returns. So is creating products people want. Five bucks says Warren has a smartphone and a DVR and a bunch of other modern conveniences, and that she didn’t buy any of them with a gun to her head. So why is she so mad at the people who offered to sell them?
(7) Warren suggests the principle of fair play means the industrialist owes society a debt, to be repaid in steep taxes because his other contributions do not count. But this argument is one of the weakest of all the arguments for political obligation, for reasons most people can figure out after a few minutes’ thought. (E.g., Suppose I mow your lawn without asking, then demand payment because it’s “only fair.”) Why hasn’t she given them any?
Conservative talk radio pundit Rush Limbaugh also weighed in on Warren’s Marxism during his September 22 radio show — here’s a partial transcript:
RUSH: There was a video taken of a campaign appearance. It’s gone viral on YouTube, a hundred thousand clicks at the time I checked it out — a hundred thousand times that it’s been viewed. Since it was put up on Sunday, it has spread like wildfire. She is a professor at Harvard Law. Her maiden name is “Herring,” and after you hear this you’re gonna realize this woman’s color is red. So an appropriate name for her would be Elizabeth “Red” Herring but she’s married now and her name is Warren. In these two sound bites, she embodies the entirety of the liberal mind-set, and I want you to listen to both of these.
[...]
Elizabeth Warren — I’ll let you hear these sound bites again — seeking a seat in the United States Senate, she’s the presumptive Democrat nominee running against Scott Brown, and she’s going house to house in a meet-the-people sort of thing, a talking tour, and she was caught Sunday saying this.
WARREN: I hear all this, “You know, well, this is class warfare. This is whatever.” No! 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. You, uh, were safe in your factory because of police forces and fire forces that the rest of us paid for. You didn’t have to worry that marauding bands would come and seize everything at your factory and hire someone to protect against this because of the work the rest of us did.
RUSH: You moved your goods to market on the roads the rest of us paid for. Now, this woman has been an Obama advisor. She oversaw TARP, appointed by Harry Reid, teacher at Harvard, Rutgers University law school, law review. Ms. Warren, those trucks that were manufactured to lay the asphalt, or cement to make those roads, those trucks were made by the private sector. Those trucks were made by some other evil factory owner. She uses the example of a factory, but now let’s go to the automobile manufacturers, the truck makers, somebody else who couldn’t have done it on his or her own without all the rest of us. The clothing worn by the people building the roads and the security forces protecting the factory owner from the marauding bands, made by people in the private sector. The same with the gasoline in the trucks and the diesel in the trucks, all of it came from the private sector.
Not any of it, zilch, came from the government. Ms. Warren, the government doesn’t have any money until it takes it from people first. But this notion that we’re all just one giant commune is the justification for the redistribution of wealth. This whole notion of paying forward is based on a premise that you can’t pay it back, you can’t pay back what was done for you, so you have to pay it forward to other people who didn’t actually directly help you. This is a spirited way of justifying the redistribution of wealth. The cement, the asphalt, all of the materials necessary to build these precious roads that this robber baron factory owner unfairly used, the money, all of it, originated in the private sector.
Nobody got rich on his own. The factory owner and his employees pay taxes. What is so difficult to understand about this? She doesn’t understand it, primarily she doesn’t want to understand it. Not only did the business pay taxes, but the owner, the factory owner, paid taxes personally as well. And, by the way, is the only thing taxes pay for is education, roads and police protection? Is that it? If that’s all our taxes paid for, Elizabeth, my, we’d be pretty cool with that. No, we gotta give money away to Solyndra. We have to have 16 different school lunch programs, so forth and so on. But this is the liberal justification for class warfare, for class envy, for redistribution of wealth, for taking, because nobody really deserves what they have.
Nobody should have anything more than anybody else because everybody always does it on the backs of other people. The biggest, most successful people in the world couldn’t have done it — and this is Obama’s worldview of the United States, I might add, when he runs around the world and apologizes, his view of the United States is exactly Elizabeth Warren’s view of the factory owner in this sound bite. I want to replay this and every time you hear her talk about the factory owner I want you to substitute the word “country.” And then think of America. For example, when she says nobody got rich on their own, you just listen to it and you substitute country for factory owner, make the appropriate substitutions, and this is exactly how Obama looks at this country and the rest of the world.
WARREN: I hear all this, “You know, well, this is class warfare. This is whatever.” No! 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. You, uh, were safe in your factory because of police forces and fire forces that the rest of us paid for. You didn’t have to worry that marauding bands would come and seize everything at your factory and hire someone to protect against this because of the work the rest of us did.
RUSH: Right. So I’ll do it for you: There is nobody in this country who got rich on his own. There is no way this country got to be a superpower on its own, no way. We became a great country, good for us, but we did it by using and taking for nothing things from other countries and other people that we had no right to and that we didn’t pay for. We used resources and people that were not ours and claimed greatness as a result. This is exactly how Obama looks at this country, the same way she looks at factory owner is how he looks at this country and the rest of the world. And not just Obama, but all the people he surrounds himself with. The factory owner, illegitimate. The business owner, illegitimate. Nothing special about him. Nothing special about somebody who built something from nothing because he really didn’t. He couldn’t have done it without screwing a bunch of other people along the way.
Never mind the fact that the owner is paying taxes, his business pays taxes, and who is to say that businesses don’t have to worry about marauding bands? The biggest marauding band business has to worry about today is something they can’t control, and that’s government, people like Elizabeth Warren. So who says, Ms. Warren, that businesses are free from marauding bands? The marauding bands of today are government regulations topped upon themselves. When this factory owner you’re talking about looks out his window the marauding band he sees is the federal government and this never-ending list of regulations. You are one of the marauding bands. You, Ms. Warren, are the type of person who wants to take as much as you can. This is the next bite. She talks about, cool, you build a factory, you get a keep a hunk of it.
WARREN: Now, look: 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.
RUSH: Why? Why should somebody have to “pay forward” for somebody that had nothing to do with what happened? Now, this is the foundation for redistribution of wealth. Also, fine… In her world, you make a factory, big product, fine, you keep a hunk of it? What’s a “hunk,” Miss Warren? Twenty percent of it? Seventy percent of it? What is a “hunk” of it? How much does this entrepreneur get to keep in your worldview? It’s undefined in her sound bites here. Ms. Warren, what do you think the EPA is if it’s not a marauding band trying to shut people down? What’s the FCC if it’s not a marauding band? What’s the Food and Drug Administration if it’s not a marauding band?
By the way, what if the factory fails, Ms. Warren?
Are you gonna pay for the failure? You gonna help ‘em keep their house? The factory builder has risked everything. Nobody else risked anything. Nobody else paying for all of this had the slightest clue what they were doing. (interruption) Well, that’s true, and they still went bankrupt. Solyndra didn’t pay for anything and they still went bankrupt. That’s what my point is. If all we were doing is paying for roads and bridges and police, fine, but we’re not. We’re paying for Solyndra and LightSquared, Fast and Furious, 16 different school lunch programs. It never ends! Now, I gotta tell you something. The left in this country is jazzed. They were celebrating this. This is the greatest thing that’s ever hit YouTube to them. You go out and look at some of the comments on some of these far-left-wing websites.
[...]
This grand total here of 60 seconds is more instructional and informative of what we’re up against. These are like one-armed lunatics in a fight. They never stop swinging no matter what. This is the kind of stuff they believe: Total collectivism. It’s all found in Marx. It’s all there, and it’s all based on the presumption that all success is illegitimate, including the success of the country. No, no, no, no. We all don’t share in the failure when the factory collapses. That’s a celebration! But according to Ms. Warren we’ve all got skin in the game, that factory owner wouldn’t be anywhere without us.
Click here for the entire Limbaugh transcript.
About the author
Comments