Anything Else Scott?

Profile in courage. - promoted by david

Warren’s statement addressing the Brown campaign smear.

“I am a hard-working teacher, I have won teaching awards, I’ve written books that have won acclaim,” Ms. Warren said. “I applied for one job in 1978 by letter, and every job I’ve had since then has been from someone who recruited me into that job. And they’ve come to me and said – and they have now said publicly – ‘Because of your work, we’d like you to come here.’ ”

“The only one, as I understand it, who’s raising any question about whether or not I was qualified for my job is Scott Brown,” Ms. Warren continued. “Frankly, I’m a little shocked to hear anybody raise a question about whether or not I’m qualified to hold a job teaching.”

Unable to post video, here is the link of Brown being questioned about his campaign pushing Warren being unqualified meme.

Coward.

UPDATE [by David]: I’ve added the video on the flip – can’t turn off autoplay, so when you open the post it should start. It’s pathetic – once again, Scott Brown desperately tries to hide behind his staff and refuses to take responsibility. Man up, Scotto.



Discuss

48 Comments . Leave a comment below.
  1. I think the globe

    should come clean about who gave them this story. That in and of itself is a big story IMHO. Bigger than the actual story in question.

  2. Best part of that video...

    Starting at about 00:17, you can see someone pulling Scott’s truck up to the building.

    So he has a driver bring him to events, then the driver pulls the truck around and leaves it for Scott to get in for the cameras afterwards.

    Just a regular guy with a truck. And a chauffeur to drive said truck.

  3. Of the two parties involved there is one person that the voters will think lied

    and I don’t think it’s Brown.

  4. Brown sullying his pretty boy/nice guy image

    This kind of attack by his campaign will do more damage to Brown than help him. His strongest asset in Republican-minority Massachusetts is his image as an independent and decent chap. He is now being repositioned as an aggressive taunting when it serves him sneaky when it serves him Fox News/Boston Herald-type candidate. That is what he is in reality, but his campaign spin is now lining up with his nature. It is a high risk strategy that evidently they feel forced to take. They are feeling the heat from Warren’s campaign.

    • It's a mistake ....

      Jim Barnett’s has been on edge lately, you could be right, maybe their internal numbers are not good.

  5. The republicans don't have chauffeurs...

    They have “aides.”

    Brown was over his head as a selectman.

  6. what a mealy-mouthed weasel

    Even the brain-dead Herald readers have to see that he looks like a weak, vacillating rodent here.

  7. I just love Charlie Pierce

    But David Paleologos, a pollster at Suffolk University in Boston, said it seemed unlikely that Ms. Warren could move past the issue unless she addressed it head on. “Now, it’s like every day there’s some new discovery or some new twist,” he said. “It’s not even about ancestry anymore; it’s about gaming the system and why did you do this?”

    C’mon, David, you know you’re grandstanding for the Times here. There is no “moving past” this unless the Herald goes out of business, which I hope never happens. You want to talk about “gaming the system”? Let’s look at the other part of that Times story, the one that got buried by “Kit” and her co-author, the part where McDreamy, Mr. 60th Vote Against Obamacare his own self, has kept his 23-year old daughter on his health-insurance, which he wouldn’t be able to do if the law he was sent to Washington to help kill hadn’t passed. Not only that but, as is his wont from time to time, McDreamy got a little pissy about the whole thing.

    “I’ve said right from the beginning, that if there are things that we like, we should take advantage of them and bring them back here to Massachusetts,” the senator said. As to whether the federal law should be repealed or rewritten, Brown replied: “I’ve already voted to repeal it. You know where I stand on this. This isn’t news.”

    In other words, it’s good for my daughter, but you kids in Tennessee or Mississippi can go whistle. Remember now, this remarkable bit of doublespeak is defending something McDreamy did this year, and not on his resume 20 years ago. But it’s “not news” because McDreamy says it isn’t. Lovely. I’ve always thought that his one real weakness is that he bought all that stuff about how he was a paradigm busting national figure, and his ego inflated in keeping with that, and that, sooner or late, some reporter or someone along the rope line is going to ask him a question he thinks is beneath him, and he’s going to blow. Warren’s weakness, I think is that she underestimates the power of pure bullshit in our politics. This race is nowhere near as much fun as it’s going to be.

    Read more: http://www.esquire.com/blogs/politics/scott-brown-half-court-shot-8546523#ixzz1tp0BCunG

  8. "You guys are asking a lot of questions....

    and I’m learning about it just as you are. I think she should answer them.” He says some version of this line about five times in one minute.

    So it’s not just that he’s a liar. All he can do is repeat what he’s been told to say. And all he talks about is Elizabeth Warren. No policies, no positions, no ideals.

    I only hope that when the debates arrive, the moderators will push him beyond his rote memory into ?????

    • Dick Cheney did this too...

      Remember him quoting the NYTimes about WMD?

      Yeah, it looks awfully familiar. The Commonwealth should be reminded of this tactic at every turn.

      And I still want the Globe to effing come out and tell us who the source was, if it was from the campaign. None of this skulking carrying water for someone. If it was not the case the Globe got this right from Eric, then come out and say it.

  9. Professor Token

    A non-issue? 87 responses to each post… doth protest too much

  10. Tom no "Yawn?"

    Besides your “nothing to see” that is your other (IMO rude) response. Unless of course you think Brown’s response story is the “nothing to see” and then of course I’m all on board!

    I learned something today from the extensive coverage. Even the 1/32 is suspect because that information was contained in an electronic record. There was no paper copied examined.

    I don’t really care, but this story has legs, the digging continues and the non-story is Brown’s response to it.

    By the way really good bit on “Morning Joe” this AM where they were yucking it up about the fact that Obama apepars in a Warren video for a person he in essence fired.

    • Yawn

      Nothing to see, move along.

    • Show us the birth certificate!

      Few things would please me more than to see Senator Brown make this argument, and follow it up with a fresh demand that President Obama release his birth certificate. Then we can have a debate about global warming, with the Senator taking the position that there are a lot of questions and he is still studying the issue, and conclude with a his rousing defense of Wall Street, Mitt Romney, the George W. Bush administration, and the Republican Party as job creators. Then Massachusetts can vote.

  11. For one thing this is a column, not an article

    and really just rehashes everything most people know.

    It takes Brown’s “elitist” remark, which he has made adds to it the assertion that he has strongly suggested she was not qualified, which I don’t think he has.

    He adds this together to make a “sexist slime.” charge

    He should be posting here, he would fit right in.

  12. What does he think it takes for a woman to be qualified?

    Warren via Keller.

    Maybe Scott could clue us in.

    • to teach law at Harvard?

      Is that a trick question? I suppose you need a law degree, but maybe not. It’s ridiculous to suggest the controversy is about whether or not she was “qualified” – Did Brown ever use that word or ask that question? No one cares in the slightest if any of the law professors at Harvard are “qualified,” we already know they are just a cabal of elitist moonbat lawyers who put politics and ideology ahead of respect for law. The idea of people caring if someone is “qualified” to teach at Harvard Law is laughable.

      • "cabal of elitist moonbat lawyers"

        This posting makes it eloquently clear now mean spirited and nasty the Right Wing is today. Incapable of carrying on intelligent conversation, they resort to this schoolyard name calling, directed (this time) at the faculty of one of the finest law schools in the world.

        • Maybe he was being sarcastic/ironic

          Even dont-get-cute doesn’t usually throw around epithets like this.

          I suspect he’s being ironic/sarcastic.

          • He shook his head and said "no"

            When the reporter asked if he was suggesting she was unqualified, Brown scrunched his eyebrows as to the ridiculousness of what that would even mean, and shook his head and said “no, he has no knowledge” that she is not qualified. The point is she is not a minority, and she was trying to up her value and social status and liberal cred by claiming to be a minority professor.

            Does anyone have a link to the press release in question?

            • "you asked a lot of questions and she should answer them"

              only problem is that Brown asked the question …

              • Here's what I found

                I can’t find the whole press release in question, but I can find a bunch of quotes that are presumably from that press release, and unless there is something else in there, the reporter is flat out lying to report that Brown was asking them to ask if she was qualified.

                “That Warren allowed Harvard to hold her up as an example of their commitment to diversity in the hiring of historically disadvantaged communities is an insult to all Americans who have suffered real discrimination and mistreatment, and Warren should apologize for participating in this hypocritical sham.”

                “This story raises serious questions about Elizabeth Warren’s credibility. The record now shows Prof. Warren did claim to be a ‘minority,’ and that she attempted to mislead the public about these facts when she was first asked about the issue last week,” said Brown spokesman Jim Barnett. “Prof. Warren needs to come clean about her motivations for making these claims and explain the contradictions between her rhetoric and the record.”

                See, absolutely nothing insinuating she was not qualified, that didn’t even cross their mind, because she’s obviously the quintessential Harvard Law professor.

                • are your really that dense ....

                  or are you pretending.

                  Here’s Scotty-boy’s reply:

                  “That’s totally stupid, ignorant, uninformed and simply wrong,”

                  Let me add, jackass, as it’s needed.

                  • Not quite

                    That wasn’t “Scotty-Boy’s” reply.
                    “That’s totally stupid, ignorant, uninformed and simply wrong,” Harvard Law School professor Charles Fried said Monday.

                    More spin at BMG.

                    • you read it wrong ....

                      the reply IS TO Scotty-Boy.

                      Pull your head out of your a**

                    • bzzzz

                      No, that wasn’t a reply to anything Brown said.

                      Charles Fried, the professor who recruited Warren to Harvard, said any suggestion that she got her job in part because of a claim of minority status was “totally stupid, ignorant, uninformed and simply wrong.”

                      It was a reply to something SHE said. He is calling WARREN s “totally stupid, ignorant, uninformed and simply wrong.”

                    • ???????????????

                      Sorry, but you’re simply not making any sense.

                      Here is the context of the line in question:

                      The professor who recruited Warren to Harvard said that any suggestion that she got her job in part because of a claim of minority status is wrong.

                      “That’s totally stupid, ignorant, uninformed and simply wrong,” Harvard Law School professor Charles Fried said Monday. “I presented her case to the faculty. I did not mention her Native American connection because I did not know about it.”

                      Whomever the “professor who recruited Warren to Harvard” was speaking to, it was most certainly not Elizabeth Warren. Not even the most tortured reading of the quote can make Charles Fried be calling Ms. Warren those things. It has been The Herald and the Scott Brown campaign who have been making “suggestions” that her alleged minority claims were a factor in her hiring.

                      The individual who hired just shot that claim down rather forcefully.

                      To try and read this in any other way is sheer lunacy.

                    • No, it was only Warren, that we know of

                      We can’t find any press release or emails or videos of anyone making “any suggestion that she got her job in part because of a claim of minority status” except Elizabeth Warren herself.

                      Please do show us where Brown ever implied that there was any doubt that she was unqualified to be a Harvard professor. While you are at it, please let us know what the qualifications to be a Harvard Law professor are.

                      I’ve seen a number of people point out that by using Warren to inflate their diversity statistics, they did reduce the need to seek out an actual minority for their faculty to make it truly diverse. Together, they misrepresnted her value to the students and school as if she offered a Native American perspective and could relate to other minority students. But no one has suggested she might not have qualified for the job otherwise, except Warren and those “reporters,” and Fried said that they were totally stupid, ignorant, and wrong to suggest that.

                    • please stop feeding the energy creature...

                      … after a certain critical mass is reached he turns into a fun vampire: draining all the fun from BMG….

                    • [6]

                      .

                    • Agreed

                      It is getting to the point where people will think I’m just bullying the poor creature. Liberals never cry “uncle” when they know they are losing an argument, they rely on being so embarrassing and cringe-worthy that the teachers intervene to stop the fight and send the bully home.

                    • "Embarrassing" and "Cringe-worthy"?

                      “Embarrassing” and “Cringe-worthy” are fair characterizations of your willful mis-reading (at best) of the statement of Charles Fried. Only you know how the words “He is calling WARREN s ‘totally stupid, ignorant, uninformed and simply wrong” came to published here. Nobody “bullied” you, you wrote them yourself.

                      I don’t know what “liberals” have to do with anything here. You posted a totally asinine comment that asserts the opposite of what Mr. Fried said. Rather than acknowledge that you screwed up, you whine about “liberals”.

                      In this case, petr is right. You’re just trolling.

                    • As is his wont

                      .

  13. A recent quote from Brown says it all:

    “Listen, the bottom line is the way that she’s approaching things, knowing better than others how to do things. The federal government can do things better than individual businesses and individuals, I think there is an elitist attitude there in the way that she’s communicating to us as citizens and telling us how to do things, who should be taxed, who should not be taxed. I’m going to continue to do what I’ve always done and that’s find solutions.”

    Because she has ideas, she is an elitist. Because she thinks she knows things; she doesn’t know her place.

    Senators decide who should and should not be taxed. But apparently, Brown “finds solutions” without a thought in his head.

    • Knowing things

      Knowing things takes actual work. It’s an odd primary-school sort of illusion to think that everyone knows enough to figure out how to run the federal government.

      Also, Scott Brown does vote on legislation. If he doesn’t know this stuff better than a random person, why does he have his current job? Doesn’t that make him underqualified?

  14. He also hides behind his wife

    You can criticize him for hypocrisy in placing his daughter on health insurance via the Obama health care bill because that is a decision that he and Gail Hoff made.

  15. There is no record of the Brown campaign mentioning qualifications

    that I have seen/heard.

    It’s the Warren campaign, and Warren herself, that keeps saying it, as well as tagging on that the reason behind it is something about women.

    If it is true, as Warren says, that “reporters have gotten e-mails from the Brown campaign” using the qualification angle she (or better yet the reporters) should produce them.

    • It's all in her head

      On Wednesday, she accused Brown’s campaign of using the Native American listing as a way of insinuating that she was not qualified for her job.

      “The only one as I understand it who’s raising any question about whether or not I was qualified for my job is Scott Brown and I think I am qualified and frankly I’m a little shocked to hear anybody raise a question about whether or not I’m qualified to hold a job teaching,” she said.

      Brown himself has not made such a claim
      , though his campaign manager has said the story raises questions about Warren’s credibility.

      Asked about the controversy following a speech in Boston on Wednesday, Brown said of Warren: “I think she needs to answer the questions that are still lingering out there.”

      The story first surfaced last week when the Herald found a 1996 article in Harvard’s student newspaper, the Harvard Crimson, about student dissatisfaction about the number of women and minority professors on the Harvard Law faculty. In the story, Harvard Law spokesman Mike Chmura referred to Warren as Native American.

      Now she needs to explain how she came to believe that “The only one as I understand it who’s raising any question about whether or not I was qualified for my job is Scott Brown and I think I am qualified and frankly I’m a little shocked to hear anybody raise a question about whether or not I’m qualified to hold a job teaching,” Maybe “as I understand it” is lawyer weasel words for “let me change the subject to something totally made-up in my deranged mind?”

  16. The insinutations could not be clearer

    Here are the various Jim Barnett quotes from this week:

    “Professor Warren needs to come clean about her motivations for making these claims,” said Jim Barnett, Mr. Brown’s campaign manager.

    “For years, Harvard has claimed special minority status for Professor Elizabeth Warren as a member of a Native American tribe and their first minority hire,” Barnett said.

    “That Warren allowed Harvard to hold her up as an example of their commitment to diversity in the hiring of historically disadvantaged communities is an insult to all Americans who have suffered real discrimination and mistreatment, and Warren should apologize for participating in this hypocritical sham.”

    Anyone who cannot or will not see that the Brown campaign is making slimy accusations about qualifications is willfully blind and dishonest. This is not “just in her head.”

    • OK, they're in your head too

      It has never crossed anyone’s mind that Warren might not be qualified for her job. Clearly we all know she’s one of their star professors, she was recruited and is highly paid and students love her, and we knew that long before we found out she ever claimed to be a minority. Now we think she wrongly claimed to be a minority to get ahead fifteen years ago, and might not be where she is if she hadn’t had that to add to her value to schools, perhaps there might be an actual minority in her position, but we certainly don’t think she has been faking being a law professor or doesn’t have what it takes to be a Harvard Law professor. Again, what does that even mean?

  17. OK Reporters, deny receiving emails.....crickets

    “Scott Brown’s campaign has been sending e-mails to reporters asking them to ask me if I’m qualified for my job. And all I can say is I busted my tail as a teacher, I am qualified for my job,” Warren said, adding that Brown had questioned the qualifications of then-Solicitor General Elena Kagan before voting against her confirmation as a Supreme Court justice.

    “If we’re gonna ask questions about qualifications,” said Warren, “maybe the appropriate person to ask those questions of is Scott Brown. What does he think it takes for a woman to be qualified?”

  18. So Brown does think Warren is qualified

    That’s good

« Blue Mass Group Front Page

Add Your Comments

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Wed 23 Apr 12:56 PM