When Does Serial Lying Become Disqualifying, Liz?

Right now, the three leading candidates for the Democrat presidential nomination are all septuagenarians.  On Election Day next year, Bernie Sanders will be 79, Joe Biden will be 78, and Liz Warren will be 71.  It may be over for the two oldest.  Bolshevik Bernie just suffered a heart attack and had two stents inserted.  (Now he's Bionic Bernie.)  Joe, often fumbling for words, has appeared "frail" from the get-go.  And we shouldn't forget the appearance of influence-peddling in Ukraine and China.  That leaves Liz, who by comparison to the other two is a spring chicken.  But Senator Warren has her own issues.

On October 7, Fox News's Tucker Carlson aired a montage of Warren on the campaign trail where she repeatedly asserts that she was "visibly pregnant" and that her employer "wished me luck" and then "hired someone else."  Watch the video montage and notice how similar her deliveries are.  At each venue, she retells her story with the same well rehearsed inflections and mannerisms.  These canned performances are all the more embarrassing because they repeat a lie.

Earlier on October 7, the Free Beacon ran "County Records Contradict Warren's Claim She Was Fired over Pregnancy" by Collin Anderson.  The article included the 12 pages of the minutes of the school board meeting in an easy-to-navigate SCRIBD box where the parts concerning Warren are circled:

Minutes of an April 21, 1971, Riverdale Board of Education meeting obtained by the Washington Free Beacon show that the board voted unanimously on a motion to extend Warren a "2nd year" contract for a two-days-per-week teaching job.  That job is similar to the one she held the previous year, her first year of teaching.  Minutes from a board meeting held two months later, on June 16, 1971, indicate that Warren's resignation was "accepted with regret."

Also on October 7, the Media Research Center's NewsBusters ran "Nets Ignore Warren's Tall Tale She Was Fired from Job over Pregnancy" by Kristine Marsh:

Just like in 2016, the networks have done their best to ignore Democrat presidential candidate scandals and lies while harping on everything surrounding Donald Trump.  After capitalizing on her grossly exaggerated Native American ancestry, frontrunner Elizabeth Warren has been caught in another lie, by her own words from twelve years ago. However, you wouldn't know this if you only watched ABC, NBC and CBS. ... Only Fox News has been covering the story, thus far.

On October 8, the Media Research Center ran "Warren Doubles Down on Claims She Was Fired in '71 for Being Pregnant" by Brittany M. Hughes.  The article embeds two tweets Warren made on Oct. 8 where she sticks to her story.  Hughes writes: "Now, it seems she's again grasping at anecdotal evidence for why she was allegedly fired from her teaching job, suggesting she simply assumed she was let go for being pregnant (despite previously indicating she'd left of her own accord)."

On October 9, Legal Insurrection ran "Elizabeth Warren's Pregnancy Discrimination Fib Uncovered by Bernie-Supporting Socialist, Not 'Right Wing' as Warren Claims" by William A. Jacobson, professor of law at Cornell, who reported that the genesis of this latest "fib" of Warren's was Meaghan Day, writer for the socialist magazine Jacobin.  The controversy seems to have started on October 1 with a Twitter war.

On October 10, National Review ran "The Media Scramble the Jets for Elizabeth Warren's Lies" by Kyle Smith, who gives a rundown of how the establishment media have been covering for Liz's latest lie: "The more the media behave like the DNC's propaganda arm, the more Americans will dismiss them as such."

Maybe Liz is suffering from some memory issues.  After all, she's old.  Or maybe she's just a chronic and habitual liar.  Indeed, maybe she engages in compulsive or pathological lying.  Regardless of the etiology for Lyin' Liz's stories, we need to get a better idea of what kind of character and temperament this woman has and whether she's fit to be president.  That's why Tucker's video montage (above) is so damned damning: Liz is quite the little actress.

It's depressing that so many Americans buy Warren's kind of politicking.  She sashays on stage like some celebrity, waving to those assembled, and then embraces some supporter, some local stooge whom I doubt she knows.  Campaigns should be more like job interviews than fan fests.  Folks need to develop a better "sense" about others, especially our celebrity politicians.

So who is the real Liz Warren?  Maybe she's like that leopard up on Mt. Kilimanjaro.  No one knows what it was doing up there; maybe it was up to no good.

On January 30, Bloomberg aired "Sen. Elizabeth Warren Says Capitalism without Rules Is Theft," a video interview conducted by Joe Weisenthal, who asks the senator about her wealth tax, which she had unveiled six days earlier.  Warren displays her usual antics as she explains her new tax and tries to justify grabbing trillions of dollars from the tiniest sliver of Americans.  As a former special needs teacher, perhaps Liz thinks Weisenthal has a disability, because she's rather condescending, talking about the "tippy top" paying their "fair share."

In March of 2018, the Mises Institute ran "Another Reminder that Elizabeth Warren Is a Fraud" by Tho Bishop:

Elizabeth Warren's entire career has been based on a lie.  I speak, of course, of the notion that she's some sort of expert on the financial sector.  Not only is the Senator from Massachusetts bad on basic economics ... but she is ignorant of basic facts that played out during the financial crisis.

Now we're getting to Liz's "Big Lie" — that Warren is an expert on finance, business, and the economy.  But what business has Warren ever run, much less created?  Warren wants to "break up Big Tech," but what does she know about technology?  Warren is a lawyer, and as an affirmative action hire at Harvard Law, we might wonder just how good of a lawyer she really is.

On October 9, the Wall Street Journal ran "Elizabeth Warren Vows to Remake Capitalism. Businesses Are Bracing" by Greg Ip and eight other writers.  You see, Warren has lots of plans for "remaking" American capitalism.  Warren doesn't want to fine-tune and improve our system; she wants to replace it.  Liz is more concerned about social justice, equality, redistribution, the damned climate, and expanding the size and scope of the central government than she is with the production of the goods and services that private enterprises work to provide.

Liz seems nothing less than a wrinkled older version of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.  But although she is on board with all the socialist programs of the other Democrat candidates, Warren has nonetheless repeatedly assured us, "I am a capitalist to my bones."  Right, but why on Earth would anyone believe her?

Jon N. Hall of ULTRACON OPINION is a programmer from Kansas City.

Image: Edward Kimmel via Flickr.

Right now, the three leading candidates for the Democrat presidential nomination are all septuagenarians.  On Election Day next year, Bernie Sanders will be 79, Joe Biden will be 78, and Liz Warren will be 71.  It may be over for the two oldest.  Bolshevik Bernie just suffered a heart attack and had two stents inserted.  (Now he's Bionic Bernie.)  Joe, often fumbling for words, has appeared "frail" from the get-go.  And we shouldn't forget the appearance of influence-peddling in Ukraine and China.  That leaves Liz, who by comparison to the other two is a spring chicken.  But Senator Warren has her own issues.

On October 7, Fox News's Tucker Carlson aired a montage of Warren on the campaign trail where she repeatedly asserts that she was "visibly pregnant" and that her employer "wished me luck" and then "hired someone else."  Watch the video montage and notice how similar her deliveries are.  At each venue, she retells her story with the same well rehearsed inflections and mannerisms.  These canned performances are all the more embarrassing because they repeat a lie.

Earlier on October 7, the Free Beacon ran "County Records Contradict Warren's Claim She Was Fired over Pregnancy" by Collin Anderson.  The article included the 12 pages of the minutes of the school board meeting in an easy-to-navigate SCRIBD box where the parts concerning Warren are circled:

Minutes of an April 21, 1971, Riverdale Board of Education meeting obtained by the Washington Free Beacon show that the board voted unanimously on a motion to extend Warren a "2nd year" contract for a two-days-per-week teaching job.  That job is similar to the one she held the previous year, her first year of teaching.  Minutes from a board meeting held two months later, on June 16, 1971, indicate that Warren's resignation was "accepted with regret."

Also on October 7, the Media Research Center's NewsBusters ran "Nets Ignore Warren's Tall Tale She Was Fired from Job over Pregnancy" by Kristine Marsh:

Just like in 2016, the networks have done their best to ignore Democrat presidential candidate scandals and lies while harping on everything surrounding Donald Trump.  After capitalizing on her grossly exaggerated Native American ancestry, frontrunner Elizabeth Warren has been caught in another lie, by her own words from twelve years ago. However, you wouldn't know this if you only watched ABC, NBC and CBS. ... Only Fox News has been covering the story, thus far.

On October 8, the Media Research Center ran "Warren Doubles Down on Claims She Was Fired in '71 for Being Pregnant" by Brittany M. Hughes.  The article embeds two tweets Warren made on Oct. 8 where she sticks to her story.  Hughes writes: "Now, it seems she's again grasping at anecdotal evidence for why she was allegedly fired from her teaching job, suggesting she simply assumed she was let go for being pregnant (despite previously indicating she'd left of her own accord)."

On October 9, Legal Insurrection ran "Elizabeth Warren's Pregnancy Discrimination Fib Uncovered by Bernie-Supporting Socialist, Not 'Right Wing' as Warren Claims" by William A. Jacobson, professor of law at Cornell, who reported that the genesis of this latest "fib" of Warren's was Meaghan Day, writer for the socialist magazine Jacobin.  The controversy seems to have started on October 1 with a Twitter war.

On October 10, National Review ran "The Media Scramble the Jets for Elizabeth Warren's Lies" by Kyle Smith, who gives a rundown of how the establishment media have been covering for Liz's latest lie: "The more the media behave like the DNC's propaganda arm, the more Americans will dismiss them as such."

Maybe Liz is suffering from some memory issues.  After all, she's old.  Or maybe she's just a chronic and habitual liar.  Indeed, maybe she engages in compulsive or pathological lying.  Regardless of the etiology for Lyin' Liz's stories, we need to get a better idea of what kind of character and temperament this woman has and whether she's fit to be president.  That's why Tucker's video montage (above) is so damned damning: Liz is quite the little actress.

It's depressing that so many Americans buy Warren's kind of politicking.  She sashays on stage like some celebrity, waving to those assembled, and then embraces some supporter, some local stooge whom I doubt she knows.  Campaigns should be more like job interviews than fan fests.  Folks need to develop a better "sense" about others, especially our celebrity politicians.

So who is the real Liz Warren?  Maybe she's like that leopard up on Mt. Kilimanjaro.  No one knows what it was doing up there; maybe it was up to no good.

On January 30, Bloomberg aired "Sen. Elizabeth Warren Says Capitalism without Rules Is Theft," a video interview conducted by Joe Weisenthal, who asks the senator about her wealth tax, which she had unveiled six days earlier.  Warren displays her usual antics as she explains her new tax and tries to justify grabbing trillions of dollars from the tiniest sliver of Americans.  As a former special needs teacher, perhaps Liz thinks Weisenthal has a disability, because she's rather condescending, talking about the "tippy top" paying their "fair share."

In March of 2018, the Mises Institute ran "Another Reminder that Elizabeth Warren Is a Fraud" by Tho Bishop:

Elizabeth Warren's entire career has been based on a lie.  I speak, of course, of the notion that she's some sort of expert on the financial sector.  Not only is the Senator from Massachusetts bad on basic economics ... but she is ignorant of basic facts that played out during the financial crisis.

Now we're getting to Liz's "Big Lie" — that Warren is an expert on finance, business, and the economy.  But what business has Warren ever run, much less created?  Warren wants to "break up Big Tech," but what does she know about technology?  Warren is a lawyer, and as an affirmative action hire at Harvard Law, we might wonder just how good of a lawyer she really is.

On October 9, the Wall Street Journal ran "Elizabeth Warren Vows to Remake Capitalism. Businesses Are Bracing" by Greg Ip and eight other writers.  You see, Warren has lots of plans for "remaking" American capitalism.  Warren doesn't want to fine-tune and improve our system; she wants to replace it.  Liz is more concerned about social justice, equality, redistribution, the damned climate, and expanding the size and scope of the central government than she is with the production of the goods and services that private enterprises work to provide.

Liz seems nothing less than a wrinkled older version of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.  But although she is on board with all the socialist programs of the other Democrat candidates, Warren has nonetheless repeatedly assured us, "I am a capitalist to my bones."  Right, but why on Earth would anyone believe her?

Jon N. Hall of ULTRACON OPINION is a programmer from Kansas City.

Image: Edward Kimmel via Flickr.