Diary

Hillary's Love Letter to Liz Warren: Thanks For Taking The Money and (Not) Running

 

It’s worth a chuckle seeing Hillary Clinton’s hagiography of [mc_name name=’Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA)’ chamber=’senate’ mcid=’W000817′ ] in Time Magazine’s “100 Most Influential People.”

The piece is short, so I’ll just quote it all here.

It was always going to take a special kind of leader to pick up Ted Kennedy’s mantle as senior Senator from Massachusetts—champion of working families and scourge of special interests. [mc_name name=’Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA)’ chamber=’senate’ mcid=’W000817′ ] never lets us forget that the work of taming Wall Street’s irresponsible risk taking and reforming our financial system is far from finished. And she never hesitates to hold powerful people’s feet to the fire: bankers, lobbyists, senior government officials and, yes, even presidential aspirants.

[mc_name name=’Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA)’ chamber=’senate’ mcid=’W000817′ ]’s journey from janitor’s daughter to Harvard professor to public watchdog to U.S. Senator has been driven by an unflagging determination to level the playing field for hardworking American families like the one she grew up with in Oklahoma. She fights so hard for others to share in the American Dream because she lived it herself.

It takes a “special kind of leader”—Lieawatha, to hold Wall Street’s bankers and lawyers—sorry I have to laugh here—to the fire.  It’s hilariously funny because Fauxahontas’ feet trample the same money-filled grapes as those she pretends to tame.

Back in 2012, when Warren was running against Scott Brown, Kevin Williamson over at National Review wrote this:

Scott Brown shares with President Barack Obama the distinction of being a recipient of very generous campaign donations from Goldman Sachs, his third-largest contributor behind two Massachusetts mainstays: Boston-based Fidelity and Boston-based Liberty Mutual. If these donations make Scott Brown the “poster child for Goldman Sachs,” then we must think of a comparable epithet for Professor Warren, whose campaign also takes in a great deal of money from Wall Street — or, in the interest of more precise metonymy, from the sewers beneath Wall Street. I am in general not much of an admirer of Wall Street bankers, but the bankers are scholars and gentlemen compared to Wall Street lawyers, who combine the rapacity and cleverness of the financier with the paid-by-the-hour-plus-a percentage complacency associated with the legal profession. With apologies to Matt Taibbi, Wall Street lawyers are the sort of people who give vampire squids a bad name.

Warren, who, so says The Washington Post, “has repeatedly, and increasingly forcefully, said she will not run” certainly had no problem accepting a $350,000 salary as a Harvard Law professor, where she taught just one class.

She rails against a “system” she says is “rigged” while agreeing with Obama who said “you didn’t build this,” all while working for those who do the rigging (and in fact actively rigging it herself).  It’s like a kid reaching into the cookie jar while saying “I’m not taking the cookies.”  And about as mature.

Alex David hit the nail on the head.

Her message is truly a poorly disguised insult. You can’t succeed like she did, you see. You’re too dumb or simply do not have the wherewithal. Not without her and her help. That’s really where the rub is, isn’t it? Liberals like Warren feed on “rescuing” the “victims” of society and place themselves as Kings and Queens of benevolence.

I don’t begrudge Liz Warren her American Dream, nor do I deny she had to work hard (or attend school while her ex-husband worked hard—either way) to earn what she has.  But it’s totally disingenuous to claim she’s fighting against the very system that put her where she is—a system Warren has never been afraid to use to her own advantage (hence, the Miss Indian Heritage award goes to her for growing up in a state where “Native America” is on the license plates, because that seems like a really solid reason).

I’m not sure that Warren owes Clinton any favors, but for the sake of the Democratic Party, I do hope Warren decides to run.

It really doesn’t matter in the end.  If the Dems put a spider monkey on the ballot in November 2016, their party faithful (meaning everyone who lives off government handouts) would vote for it.  But it’s so much better if their candidate is more serious than the beclowned Madam Yesterday they have now.