Talk Elections

FF for me.

about as good as can be asked for within the US political system.

Very HP

Misguided, though well intentioned. That's putting it kindly. HP.

I don't understand the hatred on the right towards Warren (well, I do: it's sexism, but still). None of the stuff she is saying is that controversial, is it? Do you folks seriously thinks banks should not be regulated? That agencies should not exist to protect consumers? That the corporations should be able to buy congressmen and their votes? It's not like the woman is some raging Marxist.

FF

Because obviously the Republican Party of the United States is a sexist organization.

Sarah Palin and Susana Martinez agree.

So do Nikki Haley & Kelly Ayotte & Kay Bailey Hutchison & Jan Brewer & Michele Bachmann & Marsha Blackburn & Susan Collins & Nan Hayworth & Mary Bono Mack...

Besides DWS, and Lois Frankel, I think she is the thrd most dangerous female in America.

You're right, she's a softcore socialist.

HP.

There are also plenty of black and Hispanic Republicans. Doesn't make the party any less racist.

Anyway, I didn't say anything about the Republican Party. I was talking about American conservatism, which has an undeniable under current of misogyny (see also: the attacks on Sandra Fluke, the opposition to contraception and family planning, the opposition to equal pay laws, etc.). If Elizabeth Warren were a man, these denunciations of her would be nowhere near as vitriolic and personal.

Um...that's exactly why the party isn't racist, dude. Unless you have some kind of different definition of racism.

Massive FF.

There are woman in the GOP, doesn't mean the party doesn't have sexist positions. There are also gay Republicans...doesn't mean the party supports laws that are in the interest of gay people....

And so on.

For g*d's sake, the government of apartheid South Africa employed black policemen, Vosem.

()

Most of what she says is sensible and well-intentioned. But she has no political tact and is a good example of why academics should not be politicians.

AHHHHH CRAPPY COMPUTERS

Forced labor isn't a very good example, opebo (I just dare you to reply with anything other than 'all labor is forced') -- after all, the examples I cited all voluntarily chose to enter the Republican Party, while black policemen were simply doing the best they can to get by. My grandfather was a Soviet military officer, and at the same time briefly became a practicing Hindu and maintained a secret samizdat library. The point is, any of the figures I listed above could've gone into the Democratic Party and there would not have been retribution -- which wasn't the case for black policemen in South Africa.


Er, yes it does. Could you explain why women would enter a party that has explicitly sexist positions? And, for that matter, what sexist positions does the GOP have?


As I mentioned in my long discussion with Marokai a few months ago on the matter, the GOP does support laws which are pro-gay economically, or are at least viewed by some gays as being correct economically. After all, gay rights issues nowadays are not about things that would affect gay people's lives so significantly.

Yes, the fact that there are women and black people who are in the GOP because they want to be there does mean the party is neither sexist nor racist. (You can also look at their policies to come to the same conclusion, but that takes longer.)

are you seriously trying to argue with.. no never mind there's just too much about this post that makes my head hurt. please be a troll.

She's a huge HP: she has obnoxious, populist rhetoric, but she will curb civil liberties whenever her democratic party bosses tell her.

Mark my words, as soon as she's elected, she's a puppet, not a leader.

She seems a fairly average New England Democrat to me, maybe a bit more passionate and radical regarding banking regulation, but I don't see how she's much more extremist then Ted Kennedy or other New England liberals.

What are you talking about?  Black policemen under the apartheid government weren't 'forced' to be policemen, any more than black Republicans are 'forced'.  They're just looking for career advantages.

The point is that an organization employing a particular oppressed class doesn't mean it isn't an oppressive organization.

So does Doris Day, and so did Susan B. Anthony, Elizabeth Cady Stanton, Lucretia Mott, Clara Barton, Carrie Chapman Catt, Ginger Rogers, Jane Russell, Jeannette Rankin, Margaret Chase Smith, and a host of others.

Anyone looking for a career advantage as a politician would obviously become a Democrat.  And it was Republicans who fought to free the slaves, give women the right to vote, and end segregation.  Democrats opposed all these measures. 

Anyway, Elizabeth Warren is the most left-wing Senate candidate this year, and the most dangerous since "the Accidental Senator" Al Franken (aka Stuart Smalley.)  Well-intentioned, but massive HP.

I hate her & she suck & is dume

I have to say, I've never heard Franken's Senate service described as dangerous before. He's rather demure now that he holds high office.

I can't stand Sarah anymore, but after what the liberals put her through and said about her, and they are now gonna call people sexist just for not agreeing with Warren, wtf?!

She defeated one of the nicest Federal Republicans there is. She herself leans FF, but the circumstances of her election make me wish she was a very HP so I could dislike her a bit more.

The "nicest Federal Republicans" actually ran a campaign which was both nasty and stupid. She more than earned her victory.

Nasty isn't direct enough. Brown's campaign was out and out racist.

Tammy Baldwin is another liberal victory in the Senate.

A very welcome change to the current corrupt political system. A massive and unabashed FF. After Teddy died we were missing our Lion. Liz Warren shall become the new Liberal Lion of the Senate. Though I hope she doesn't become our Presidential Nominee. It'd be too easy for the right to paint her in the mold of McGovern, Mondale, Dukakis, and Kerry as too far to the left and dangerous. But she'd make a great VP.

I totally agree with this. She has great potential in the United States Senate and will do a fantastic job in that seat. I totally believe she'll do justice for that seat and the legacy of Ted Kennedy. He must've been spinning in his grave so long as Scott Brown held that seat. I'm not sure that she'll be a liberal lion per se, but I think Ted Kennedy would be proud and I believe she'll make her supporters proud as well.

And Scott Brown as "nice moderate" was a myth anyway.

Not a fan, especially since she beat a far superior opponent.

Superior in what respect? I mean, purely ideologically, I imagine a right-winger will say Scott Brown is superior and a left-winger will say Elizabeth Warren is superior.....but that's the only basis from which you can claim Scott Brown is "far superior".

Going just by their credentials and intellect....a non-hack cannot reasonably come to the conclusion that Elizabeth Warren wouldn't be a more suitable senator.

accidentally voted HP. She seems like a good person, but the best part is that her victory rids us of this useless populist fake moderate hero/centrist/moderate tool Scott Brown (for now).

Brown actually has governmental experience, as a Senator, as a State Senator, as a State Representative, as a selectman, and as an assessor. Warren has been a professor and a bureaucrat. So yes, Brown has superior credentials.

How?

FF