Elizabeth Warren

Don't Read This if You Think Elizabeth Warren is the Future of American Politics


Courtesy Tim Pierce; click through for original.

Updated on March 5: Note the photo credit I just added. The shot of Warren was taken by Tim Pierce on November 3, 2012 and is posted here. His main Flickr page—well worth spending time at—is here.

Sharp piece by Russ "Mugger" Smith at SpliceToday. He takes aim at the heartfelt belief among progressives and liberals that there is some sort of groundswell for left-wing populism as personified by Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.). Smith trains his sites on Daily Beast columnist, former American Prospect editor, and Hillary Clinton biographer Michael Tomasky, who recently wrote a weak-in-the-knees mash note to Warren in The New York Review of Books.

Where does Tomasky think all the foot soldiers for The Cause are going to come from, aside from liberal media outlets? A neutral observer (which I'm not) will, after shaking the cobwebs, recall the short-lived Occupy Wall Street movement from a few years ago that was, if you believed the rhapsodic press accounts, the new force that would bring Wall Street, the Tea Party, the "1 percent," mega-banks, Rupert Murdoch, the Koch brothers, insurance companies and corporations like Walmart to their knees. (It goes without saying that Hollywood millionaires and Silicon Valley tech billionaires are exempt from scorn.) It didn't happen, of course, as the rudderless throngs that gathered at Zuccotti Park and countless other urban locations either got bored or frustrated with their protests. OWS, which for several months really did look like a potential political player—far more significant than blue-state scold Elizabeth Warren—squandered its potency and, at least right now, is a footnote.

In fact, writes Smith,

if there were a significant populist wave that captures the imagination of Americans, I'd say it's likely to come from the Republican Party, with the likes of Sen. Rand Paul (sculpting a more "electable" image every day), Govs. Scott Walker and John Kasich and maybe Sen. Marco Rubio. The Other Side. It's messy: the GOP would need to dispatch the polarizing and narcissistic Sen. Ted Cruz, insufferable moralists Rick Santorum and Mike Huckabee, forget the names Mitt Romney and Chris Christie and dispel any idea that Jeb Bush might be the palooka to combat Mrs. Clinton.

Whole thing here.

Related: "5 Other Fake Indians Besides Elizabeth Warren."

NEXT: Thai Court Endorses Prime Minister's Declaration of State of Emergency

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Lizzie White Sqauw is the true life coming of Idiocracy.

    1. I hope she wins so we know we really do live in the best of all possible worlds.

      1. The darkest timeline.

      2. Somehow those damn guns will get in the way

      3. If both houses are controlled by Republicans, I’m not sure it wouldn’t be for the best, except Republican stupidity seems to be generally less damaging in the longer run than Democratic stupidity. I’d like to think a Republican controlled House, Senate, and Presidency, would fix some of the mess that was created. It’s more likely, they’ll just try to maintain the status quo, whatever it may be at that time. I say replace elections with a random drawing from registered voters. It would save us money and it’s doubtful it could get worse.

    2. Still mocking Warren with that indian story, eh? BECAUSE YOU COULDN’T find anything else!!!

      Kind of like when we talk about crooked politicians you people drag Ted Kennedy from his grave, or about racism, Senator Byrd, while ignoring the long list of Family Values/racist candidates on your side of the aisle ….


      1. Her fundamental assertions refute themselves and provide weak fare for derision. Hypocrisy is a deep well, however, especially when it uncovers how big a scam the whole diversity schtick really is.

  2. Oh, come on, communism will totally work this time. We can effectively implement it. Let’s see some of that good old fashioned “can do” spirit, America!

    1. If that is not the face of someone who exudes leadership and competence in a way that Stalin, Lenin and Mao never could, I don’t know my ass from a hole in the ground. Excuse me while I go take a shit, or dig a well, or something.

    2. Yeah. Super computers can take care of everything effectively, efficiently, and equitably!


      1. And awesome Government Websites, too. Don’t forget those.

    3. Yeah but this time we have computers! And we’re all WAY smarter now! And income inequality!

      We’re the ones we’ve been waiting for!

    4. Oh, come on, selling scary “Communism Boogeyman” stories will totally work this time!!!

      This time, the Mythical White Voter will totally believe and will vote to have his health care taken away, his wages dropped, and his kids sent to Iran!!

      I tell ya, them hillbillies will believe the Koch Brothers for SURE this time.

      1. They already got all that, by voting for Obama.

  3. Gawd, I can’t stomach yet another fucking Clinton-Bush faceoff. We’re becoming a goddamn diarchy up in here.

    1. Non-Dynasts need not apply.

    2. I doubt it.

      While there is no doubt that it’s Hitlary’s turn for team blue, I think that at this time, team red have not yet selected their chosen one. I can’t even come up with a guess at this point.

      1. I’d be willing to lay down cash money that it will not be a Tea Party or libertarian GOP member.

        1. I keep saying: Scott Walker/Rand Paul 2016.

          1. I can see Walker happening. But he’ll pick a non-white and/or non-male as his running mate. Like Bobby “Raj” Jindal. Or Nikki “Raj” Haley.

            1. At least Nikki Haley would give us something nice to look at.

              1. It would be funny to see the Left tie itself up in knots with convoluted explanations about how, even though the GOP has nominated an Indian, they are still a bunch of racists!

                I’m guessing, it would be something along the lines of Indians aren’t a ‘real’ oppressed minority or some such gobbledygook.

                1. They will just call him the token minority used by the GOP as a puppet to try to show they are not a bunch of racists

                2. Haven’t you heard? Republican women aren’t “really” women.

                  1. They were chosen from binders, after all.

              2. If she gets picked, how long before “Sticky Nikki” or some other porno gets made about her?

            2. “run raj” Yea! I’m in

        2. It won’t be Rand Paul, I’m in 100% agreement with you on that. And he’s the only libertarian candidate that would have any chance at all to win some primaries.

          So, yeah, I agree with you. It will be another Dem lite statist posing as a centrist/conservative. The GOP establishment just cannot help themselves. I just don’t know who it will be yet. I think that Crhistie, although he fits that description, is a non starter.

          1. They’re still waiting for Nelson Rockefeller’s clone to come of suitable age.

            1. Why not Romney II, The Revenge of Romney?

              1. It only received 1 star and got killed at the box office.

              2. Or Romney II, Electric Boogaloo

          2. Take a chance on the roll of dice with a libertarian when they have a sure thing? Are you freakin’ kidding me? That would be insane! /2012 Team Romney derp

          3. “I think that Christie…is a non starter.”

            That’s what makes him so perfect for the GOP.

          4. They might let Rand Paul win the nomination, thinking he will get steamrolled by Grandma Clinton. And then being rudely surprised in November.

        3. I’d be willing to lay down cash money that it will not be a Tea Party or libertarian GOP member.

          I will not take that bet.

          1. Me neither. First, Jeb will never be the nominee. I voted for him for governor three times and feel that he did a good job as governor but there is no way I would vote for him in the primary. I would bet cash money that the nominee will be Paul. Granted, I’m a member of the Tea Party and that colors my view, but I think he has the widest appeal among the possible Republican candidates.

            1. Paul would be the best choice if the GOP wants to win. He will not be the nominee.

      2. The George P. Bush presidency will be the one that gets it right.

        1. Is there a George Q. Bush waiting in the wings, just in case?

    3. 2020 Presidential Election

      O Clinton, Jong-Il (D)
      O Bush, Jong-Un (R)

      1. Well, they have dead people vote, so why not run them as well.

        (And shouldn’t that be Kim, since we list Family names?)

      2. George P Bush versus Chelsea Clinton

        1. Jenna Bush vs Chelsea Clinton.

          meow, cat fight

    4. Vote for or against them because of their policies, not their names.

      1. Shirley you cannot be serious!?

        1. I am serious, and don’t call me surely.

      2. What policies? Oh you mean the ones that change the moment they enter office.

        1. Yep, their policies always change after they get into office.

          Policy before office = get as many big donors as possible to fork over cash for campaign.

          Policy after office = pay back big donors with crony bills and high paying jobs in administration.


            1. Last presidential election – no one.

              I forgot to file for an absentee ballot and was out of the country on election day. (oops)

              1. Take comfort that your vote wouldn’t have mattered anyway.

                1. Well, it was a New York vote. They had three dead people to counterbalance me.

            2. Gary Johnson.

            3. BRO DO YOU EVEN ELECTION!?!?

      3. A vote for or against them is a vote for or against whomever they’re running against!

      4. And their policies just about uniformly suck. Their names are just icing on the cake.

    5. Chelsea is just waiting for her turn.

      1. You’ve seen it here first (or not).

    6. all atheist liberals are praying it will be a Cruz Rand tagteam. We’ve given up hope that Palin-Bachman will run.

    7. Gawd, I can’t stomach yet another fucking Clinton-Bush faceoff. We’re becoming a goddamn diarchy up in here.

      You’re right. We really need another Kennedy.

  4. The Occupy Wall Street movement didn’t squander its moment. It was an astroturf movement that had its marionette strings cut the moment Warren Buffet hijacked the ‘movement’ to push for an Inheritence Tax (that would have pushed more people to by life insurance from Warren Buffet’s life insurance companies) and it became clear that Soros’ “Robin hood Tax” on securities trades (making arbitrage trades more expensive, reducing the number of traders and giving Soros more time to act on arbitrage opportunities before they dissipated) was not going to happen.

    The moment Buffet appeared on the stage with Obama, Occupy Wall Street began its precipitous decline.

    1. Such ridiculous drivel masked as CT.

      1. A butthurt buttplug.

        1. tarran is a fool.

          OWS was a waste of time with no message – just youthful angst. They squandered two weeks of free mass media PR. But they never had a chance anyway.

          Then tarran tacks on some fictional nonsense about how Buffett and Soros magically cut OWS off for business reasons that make up less than .0001% of their profits.

          What an idiot. Sadly, in the John mold.

          1. Ah, the masked Buffet/Soros defender comes out. Beware!

            1. Don’t beware. Mock.

              1. Don’t mock. It’s too stupid to understand that it is being mocked. It conflates abuse with respectful discourse, and is only encouraged when people interact with it.

              2. Its fun to yawn at caged baboons, I think ButtP would respond similarly.

          2. Don’t lock eyes with ’em, don’t do it. Puts ’em on edge. They might go into berzerker mode; come at you like a whirling dervish, all fists and elbows. You might be screaming “No, no, no” and all they hear is “Who wants cake?” Let me tell you something: They all do. They all want cake.

            1. The Cake is a Lie!

          3. But they never had a chance anyway.

            That is where you are wrong.

            The dems took the reigns and steered them into a wall….right where they wanted them.

            I would not say Buffet was the stake in the heart. More like Palosi and Warren and Obama who cheered from the sidelines while their dem comrades in Mayor offices brought in the storm troopers.

          4. butt this, butt that …. why are KKKonservatives so gay?

  5. I just don’t think we’re quite that far gone yet on a national level. Obama was kind of a fluke to begin with, and we’re apparently completely paralyzed by half of his racial background. Not to mention we have ample evidence now that these people are, by any rational standard, completely psychotic, having broken with reality long ago.

    1. No worries about white squaw, that’s for certain. If she makes too much noise, the Clintons will make sure she has an unfortunate accident.

      1. She is an unfortunate accident.

      2. She’ll sleep with Vince.

      3. You guys think you could squeeze just a little more racism into six lines of text?

        1. I have nothing against Native Americans. I have a lot against people who claim to be something they aren’t in order to game the system. Just calling out a fraud.

        2. You guys think you could squeeze just a little more racism into six lines of text?

          More racist than a white woman fraudulently claiming Indigenous ancestry to gain acceptance to organizations she would otherwise never have qualified for???

          1. That didn’t happen. Stop lying.

    2. “we have ample evidence now that these people are, by any rational standard, completely psychotic.”

      Never stopped us from electing them before. We’ve had evidence of that for a long time now.

      1. I’m willing to accept that I may be wrong, but she seems like Obama, except that we know she’s a loon for sure. I mean the big we, as in the entire fucking planet.

        1. “I’ve only been alive for six weeks. I know nothing of the world beyond this dog’s stomach. And I still find ‘Six Feet Under’ Elizabeth Warren pretentious.”

  6. Meh. She is very popular in certain circles. However, she’s not the mainstream left so the proggies will have to do a good job of selling her to the mainstream. Also, she will have to actually win both a primary and a national election.

  7. Regarding Fauxcohontas; the very qualities that made her electable here in Massachusetts (batshit insanity, economic creationism, hatred for the working poor, racism) make her damn near unelectable nationwide.

    My guess is that she’ll do well in New Hampshire (the massholes that vote in NH’s D primaries will eagerly vote for her), and then hit a brick wall.

    1. The same analysis in 2006 would have said Obama was a fringe left-wing Senator out of the mainstream.

      1. But Obama didn’t run as a fringe left wing senator. He touted himself as a sober centrist, a grownup to repair the damage caused by Bush.

        Comically, bush did the same thing running against Clinton’s legacy.

        Americans keep falling for the liars’ lies – hook, line and sinker.

        1. What’s to stop Warren from doing something similar? What’s to stop her calling herself a centrist? The legacy media would buy it. Plus she’s a woman, possible the First Woman President – without the Clinton baggage.

          Instead of being a radical law professor baiting Wall Street, she could be the populist who *stands up* to Wall Street (the least popular street in America) while proposing “common sense solutions” to our economic woes. And right-wing extremists are calling her a radical just like they tried to do with Obama!

          1. she could be the populist who *stands up* to Wall Street (the least popular street in America)

            That is already her MO. She ran against the “banksters” and is crafting a Glass-Steagall Part II while in the Senate.

            Never mind the fact that she has publicly admitted that a fully intact Glass-Steagall would not have prevented the 2008 Financial Meltdown.

          2. Look for the prime-time interview in which a sympathetic journalist asks such hard-hitting questions as:

            -How does it feel to be considered maybe the First Woman President? Does it give you a Sense of Grave Responsibility to other women?

            -How do you explain to your children all the nasty things the right wing says about their mother? “radical leftist,” “fake Indian,” etc. Do you shield your kids from this sort of thing, or do you sit them down and talk it over?

            -Are you afraid that the Big Banks will sink your candidacy?

          3. Because unlike Obama, she isn’t a cipher. She has left a paper trail.

            And, she isn’t going to get the same pass that Obama did. The thinking is that women will vote for the first female candidate and give her a boost. I don’t think that’s necessarily the case. My mom and a few other women have commented that Warren’s hair style and clothing style all signal a woman who has high opinion of her looks and is really narcissistic. I know that there is *huuge* sampling bias here, but I was struck by the nearly identical reactions.

            With my nearly Aspie ignorance of style, I just don’t see what they see, but this is a vibe she is apparently communicating that other women are picking up.

            And, Obama’s admin took a micro-political hit keeping her out of heading the consumer credit protection organization she had been championing when putting her in charge of it would have been politically safe as houses. I think she has powerful enemies within the establishment who dislike her personally.

            My guess is that she will have little support from the establishment in the primaries, and will be struggling to get the middle class to support her and thus will die.

            1. I’m not presuming to predict the future, just saying she has some advantages with the media in her corner.

              Imagine the feature stories about how “the controversy over Elizabeth Warren’s clothes illustrates the everyday dilemmas of professional women who, etc.” And “Is American ready for a strong woman as President?” And “Elizabeth Warren at Home.”

              1. I’m not presuming to predict the future, just saying she has some advantages with the media in her corner.

                All left-progressive-democratic candidates have the media in their corner. That’s a given.

            2. tarran|2.19.14 @ 1:27PM|#
              “Because unlike Obama, she isn’t a cipher. She has left a paper trail.”

              Yeah, of fraud to get her position. And her bootlickers are just fine with fraud.

            3. “Because unlike Obama, she isn’t a cipher.”

              Neither was Obama, if one ever ventured to look back at anything he ever said pre-campaign. He was very clearly anti-market and pro central planning. The problem is that people really don’t care or understand. They just buy whatever the line of the day is from their news media and don’t bother to investigate any further than that.

              1. He was very clearly anti-market and pro central planning.

                What, you mean like every other candidate not named Paul or Johnson.

                The basic political philosophy of both parties in 20th century America was Managerial Liberalism, the idea that no problem was so big that good old American know-how applied by top men in the government couldn’t solve it.

                Until Barry Goldwater challenged the notion the only contest in Presidential elections was who was the better practitioner, ie the better manager to do all the problem solving. Voters soundly rejected this Goldwater and his ideas.

                It almost looked liked Managerial Liberalism was beaten when Reagan got elected but, long story short, it wasn’t.

                1. While there is more support for conservative and libertarian ideas now than there was in 1964 it’s not enough to win elections.

                  As long as the first question on voters’ lips is, “who is best qualified man to ‘run the country’?”, Managerial Liberalism is alive and well and will take the day in an election between Tweedledum and Tweedledee.

          4. What’s to stop Warren from doing something similar? What’s to stop her calling herself a centrist?

            She’s a True Believer. Her ego and ideology would get in the way of any practical political aspirations.

            Obama was a product of The Machine.

            1. You would think that America wouldn’t elect an arrogant, aloof, nigh-megalomaniacal professor, but there’s Wilson.

              1. I say, there’s a place for arrogant, aloof, nigh-megalomaniacal professors, and it’s a darkened laboratory with a hunchbacked assistant, bubbling test tubes, and spark-generating rods.

              2. A hundred years is a long time Eddie.

                1. I’m not saying it *would* happen, just that it can’t be ruled out.

                  1. And we’ve had two professor-Presidents recently, BC and BHO.

                    1. The constitutional scholar, BHO?

            2. Her ego and ideology would get in the way of any practical political aspirations.

              I wish this were true, then I might have some respect for her. I see her as just another political pragmatist who will do what it takes to get where she wants. She ain’t no idealist operating on principle, that’s for sure.

          5. What’s to stop her calling herself a centrist?

            Nothing. Absolutely nothing.

            But she’s not going to, which is a different matter entirely. She’s branded herself as a progressive and will stick with that defined brand. If she tries to move to the center her base will abandon her.

            And Obama and the Clintons are indeed the centrist wing of their party. I know that’s difficult for some people to see from two or more steps away.

            1. If Obama is centrist, then who would be a radical? Maduro?

              1. Warren, of course, as stated above.

                And please note that I wrote the centrist wing of their party, which is a different thing than centrist-centrist.

            2. Exactly. The reason the people that people who like her actually like her is the progressive bona fides. If she goes centrist, she loses them, and that’s all she has in the first place.

              1. But these are folks who believe in Noble Lies (“if you like your insurance,” etc.). They would be able to rationalize centrist rhetoric as necessary to rope in the rubes.

            3. A percentage of the disenchanted Obama voters, will go for Warren. Because that faction of disenchanted O voters are disenchanted because he’s not leftie enough. So Warren is their new hero. Hillary’s too old and neocon like for them.

              But it won’t matter, there is not enough of those voters to get Warren the nomination. And even if she did have some chance, the Clinton machine will squash her flat like the road runner does with the coyote on that cartoon.

              1. Yes, I think the main threat to Warren is her own party.

                If she got the nomination, she and the media would look for ways to pitch her as an aw-sucks centrist, while winking to the radicals that she’s really One of Ours.

                So with the nomination in hand, she’d have a good chance – better than the chance of getting the nomination in the first place.

                1. Well, you have to know that people who trust in big over bloated corrupt government, to the extent of being eager to hand them even more power, they are pretty damn easy to fool.

            4. I agree. They are the center of the Democrats. There aren’t too many genuinely conservative Democrats anymore, and you can certainly get a whole lot more left than Obama. It’s important to remember that cetrists, whether of the center of one of the big parties or of the center-center are the hardest core statists usually. Yes, we have been saddled with a bunch of new big government shit in the past 10 years, but it is centrist shit. The center isn’t halfway between total government and no government. It is halfway between right wing statism and left wing statism.

              1. The center isn’t halfway between total government and no government. It is halfway between right wing statism and left wing statism.

                Well said.

          6. What’s to stop Warren from doing something similar? What’s to stop her calling herself a centrist?

            #1 Both Bush and Obama were rolled out on the national stage as mainstream candidates who were going to govern sensibly. From her first rumblings on the national stage, she’s been a hardline progressive. And, as tarran suggests, she has a mile-long paper trail to throw at her if she tries doing an about face.
            #2 Both Bush and Obama ran as cleaning up the excesses of the other side. Warren isn’t going to be able to credibly claim that Barack Obama is on the other side of the political aisle as her, even on financial regulation, when he nominated her to run one of his financial regulators. Even if she tried, that strategy would run the risk of tearing apart her own party, as she would have to explicitly run against the record of Barack Obama.

            1. How many people will remember this?

        2. FDR ran as a common-sense centrist against Hoover’s failed Progressive mess.

          It’s an old recipe. Any time a Democrat can get to the right of the Republican in the general, it’s a landslide.

          1. FDR ran on a 25% cut in federal spending. Heck, I would have fallen for that the first term.

      2. I think that the only reason Obama won in 2008 was because so many Dems secretly despise her, but don’t want to admit it.

        Obama was the perfect out for them. They could keep their liberal bona fides intact AND not vote for Hillary.

        He won because he wasn’t Hillary. I’m guessing there will be a lot of the same dynamic this time around. No one will publicly denounce her, but they will sure vote for any viable alternative.

        1. He won because he wasn’t Hillary

          Or Bush, or McCain. That pretty much sums it up.

        2. What His Holiness said.

        3. And for that reason I very much doubt Hillary gets the nomination, too many people hate her. Well, that and the fact that she is very old and has a lot of well documented history that can be used against her.

    2. Yeah, I cannot see her doing well outside of the media echo chamber. But, like Hillary, she is a woman, and TEAM BLUE is getting really addicted to historic firsts. I’m getting the sense that they’re in the stage now where they’re going to want every potential candidate to be a historic first of something (even though that well would dry up incredibly fast; but we know they aren’t the best planners for the future).

      1. that well would dry up incredibly fast

        Not if they all get 8 years. You’ve got first woman, black woman, hispanic, hispanic woman, gay, lesbian, furry, those idiots that say they’re sharing headspace with cats and mythical creatures, etc. I mean, facebook lists, what, like 32 different genders now? That’s a long time. probably longer than it would take them to run the US into the ground and have to “update” our government system.

      2. that well would dry up incredibly fast

        Not if they all get 8 years. You’ve got first woman, black woman, hispanic, hispanic woman, gay, lesbian, furry, those idiots that say they’re sharing headspace with cats and mythical creatures, etc. I mean, facebook lists, what, like 32 different genders now? That’s a long time. probably longer than it would take them to run the US into the ground and have to “update” our government system.

        1. I only hit submit once. It’s definitely not 3 pm yet.

          1. it’s 3PM somewhere /time for a drink

          2. The squirrels are subtle and quick to anger.

  8. with the likes of Sen. Rand Paul (sculpting a more “electable” image every day), Govs. Scott Walker and John Kasich and maybe Sen. Marco Rubio

    I stopped reading right there. When a writer starts insinuating that Rand Paul and Marco Rubio have anything in common politically, I’m going to stop taking anything they say seriously, right at that moment. In fact, I’m going to go out on a limb here and suggest that this guy is pretty ignorant about politics and shouldn’t be writing about the topic. Maybe sports opinion pieces would be a better fit.

    1. They’re both TEAM RED, and therefore indistinguishable to 90% of all pundits.

      1. ^This.

        From where most of us are, there is a huge difference between Paul and Rubio, not so much between Clinton and Warren. From someone on the left there is no discernable difference between Paul and Rubio, but huge differences between Clinton and Warren.

        1. I don’t see much difference within either pair. Where does that put me?

    2. One sipped excessive water on national TV.
      The other worshiped the Aqua Buddha. So there’s the water commonality.

    3. When a writer starts insinuating that Rand Paul and Marco Rubio have anything in common politically

      All he said was a more “electable” image. So, you think there is only one image that is electable?

  9. Thanks Nick. Now I am going to spend the entire day locked in a death struggle with myself to prevent posting this on my Facebook page, where it will only cause trouble, leading to tears and gnashing of teeth.

    1. ” where it will only cause trouble, leading to tears and gnashing of teeth.”

      What’s the struggle then? Sounds like the perfect reason to post it to me.

  10. I know people who think Elizabeth Warren is a fucking genius.

    They’re probably sad they never had the chance to vote for William Jennings Bryan.

    1. They aren’t the same people who think that Obama is the smartest guy in history, are they?

  11. Latvia 1 Canada 1, half-way through second.

  12. [From last year.] The best I’ve seen, from Twitter, arranged Letterman-style.

    Top Ten Elizabeth Warren Indian Names

    10. Little Pantsonfire

    9. Woman Who Loves Eater of Dogs

    8. Lie-a-watha

    7. Hoarder of Feathers Who Hates Feather Hoarders

    6. Sitting Bullsh*t

    5. Hunts at Whole Foods

    4. Running Joke

    3. Taxagawea

    2. Dances With Occupiers

    And the number one Elizabeth Warren Indian name:

    1. Fauxcahontas

    1. #6 is excellent

    2. It’s a toss up between 8 and 3. Both are excellent.

    3. Lie-a-watha is killing me. awesome

    4. Someone (Jim Treacher I think) had my favorite – “Stands-With-A-Writ”

  13. Saw her being interviewed on some MSLSD show, maybe Madcow, and the appeals to emotion were just plain disgusting. She didn’t say a damn thing, but you could feel the emotion in her voice. You could tell she felt so strongly about whatever nonsense she was softly saying that only a mean person could possibly disagree. If they could figure out anything definable to disagree with. It was oddly mesmerizing.

    1. MSLSD

      Gold, Sarc! Gold!

      1. Saw an Alex Jones fan say it over a year ago. Ironically LSD’s creator held a big fundraiser for Ron paul in 1988.

        1. Actually, Albert Hofmann the first person to synthesize LSD. He was also the first person to ingest it, and learn of its psychedelic effects.

          So while Timothy Leary, who did indeed hold a fundraiser for Ron Paul in 1988, was one of LSD’s most famous researchers and users, he was not its creator.

  14. She’s going to make a great VP for Hillary.

    1. Which in itself will become a great series of stories from SugarFree.

      1. I need a few minutes here.

        1. If you post some Hillary on Elizabeth porn, I’ll probably shit myself. So go ahead, make my day…

          1. Ugh! If you are going to write that pr0n, you better make reference to this.

            Those two dried up beavers are going to need all that lube and then some.

          2. I shared the one he wrote about Sebelius the dominatrix to my wife. She liked it.

        2. Inside the teepee made of foreskins, Face-Of-Many-Wrinkles looked down upon her new cub, Fauxcohontas.

      2. Warty will have some “business” in the White House somehow, I bet.

    2. Nope, I don’t see that. They are going to need to balance Hillary with a male VP candidate, preferably a racial minority.

      1. Bet you a dollar.

      2. Well, right now we have a black man and a retarded man. So next we have to have a woman and…I’m guessing a latino trans person in a wheel chair.

        1. “latino trans person in a wheel chair”

          They did the wheelchair thing already.

          1. Yeah, but they didn’t brag about it.

      3. Cory Booker, I would presume.

        1. Awesome. Can’t wait for more of his awesome True Stories of the Ghetto!

  15. If she runs in 2016 it won’t be a run for the win, but to move the Team Blue platform to the left. Also, the experience will do her well when she runs next – which will be 2020 if Team Red wins in 2016, or 2024 if Team Blue wins in 2016 (presuming that they manage to hang on for two terms).

    I think that Rand Paul is something of an analogue for Elizabeth Warren – both represent non-mainstream but increasingly popular wings of their respective parties.

    1. Sure, she’ll move the D platform to the left in 2016, which Hillary will promptly ignore. She’s too smart for that–she knows she needs a platform that doesn’t piss off the independents.

    2. This sounds about right. The question– in both parties, really — is how much of these non-mainstream wings will be represented in their Presidential candidacies. Interestingly, Rand Paul does seem to have a path to nomination and a larger constituency than Warren; perhaps he might even pull it off or play John the Baptist to the guy who will.

      1. My personal feelings are that the Pauls are destined for JtB status. They keep making bad associations – Rockwell for Sr, Cuccinelli for Jr.

        1. So did Reagan. Mostly doesn’t matter if you can connect with people and their concerns. On that front, I’d say Rand is somewhere between Reagan and his dad.

        2. Cooch isn’t as toxic as Rockwell, not even close. It’s hard to tie Cuucinelli’s SoCon positions to Rand when Rand is arguing for giving felons the right to vote and scaling back the Drug War.

          1. Cooch isn’t as toxic as Rockwell, not even close.

            Tonyo is a true warrior. Back in November he was claiming that anybody who voted for Cooch clearly did so because of the “filthy gays” and not for any other reason.

            He’s as rational on this topic as Dems are on race or Sevo is on religion.

  16. Tomasky is encouraged that liberal media outlets like The Washington Post, The Nation, The New Republic, Daily Beast (where he writes DNC press releases) and The Washington Monthly are all on-board with the hope that Democrats are shedding the shackles of Bill Clinton’s “Third Way” policies. Why he left out The New York Times, Talking Points Memo and The Daily Kos is left unexplained”

    Oh, silly = they need to pretend that *someone* out there is being, like ‘objective’ and shit.

  17. You must be on the firewater if you think Ms. Warren is not cause for the next groundswell. Tales of her repeated counting coups of Wall Street pale faces will no doubt be passed down from generation to generation. Anyone who says she’s not a contender speaks with forked tongue. And so on.

    1. Squaw Warren make heap trouble for Big Chief of Red Tribe.

      1. Banker man greed loot many family’s teepee, so Chief Lizze Fauxhawk take my banker scalps until nation heart whole again.

        1. We’ll all be lucky to have teepees to subsist in before too long if the federal government keeps spending the way it is. Chinese teepees maybe.

          1. Chief Lizzie Fauxhawk won’t rest until we all live off government beef and banking.

    2. ” Have you ever heard the wolf cry to the blue corn moon? “

      1. Can you paint with all the colors of the wind?

  18. Seeing Warren challenge Hillary would be worth it for the Tracy Flick comparisons to become relevant again

    1. I might vote for Reese Witherspoon, assuming she were drunk and feisty during her entire campaign.

  19. Seriously, the woman is not just an economic illiterate, she’s a total fraud. She lied about her ethnicity. Her thesis was nearly rejected because one advisor was convinced it was fraudulent. Her later “research” was bullshit. She made money flipping foreclosed homes. She plagiarized recipes. She used her university office for private business. She’s a rich, self-serving hypocrite spouting a socialism she wants to apply to other people, not herself.

    1. Can you think of any other candidate more ideal to represent the essence of the American left?

      I’ve seen her speak in YouTube videos, I don’t think she’s capable of giving a speech without sounding condescending and contemptuous of her audience.

      1. The kind of president we deserve.

      2. Everyday is Condescending Bitch Day when Hillary or Warren enter the room.

    2. How does that make her different than the Clintons or Obamas? (Other than her records aren’t sealed?)

    3. That she successfully flipped foreclosed homes is probably the only positive thing I know about her. Otherwise, she’d be a perfect villain in Ayn Rand’s book.

    4. And so far she is getting a total pass about the indian ancestry claim. She won’t be able to run from that in a national race. It will be damaging but can be overcome with appropriate payoffs or patronage.

      1. We should demand a DNA analysis.

          1. No, but in her case, I’m willing to learn.

      2. I think it won’t be a big deal. There was some story in the family about some Indian ancestor, blah, blah.
        Maybe I’m wrong, but I don’t care. I do care that her policies would be completely awful. I automatically assume that any successful politician is a liar.

  20. “Have you ever been in an interracial sexual relationship?” Lizzy asked Hillary, in an excited whisper.

    “There were a few Black Panthers in college that I filmed for class credit,” Hillary replied. She was rubbing her clitoris through three layers of pantyhose, making a noise like grating hard cheese.

    “And Bill fucked some fat little Jew whore, but I only got the left-over cigars.” She shivered as Lizzy traced her bitten nails over the engorged blue-black rivulets of varicose veins through Hillary armored pantyhose.

    The limo lurched and a teaspoon of urine leaked into Lizzy’s non-absorbent sustainably-grown Guatemalan peasant panties. They were cut from unwashed UN food-aid burlap sacks and chafed her wrinkled pudendum until it bled. They cost $160 per pair.

    “Are we almost there?” she asked Hilary. “I want your mouth on me. I didn’t have garlic for dinner last night.”

    “And yours on me, but I can’t get these hose off in the car Lizzy.”

    “I’ll cut them off. I have a tomahawk in my purse,” Lizzy said. Lizzy fumbled in her huge purse. A dreamcatcher tumbled to the floor and then a fistful of deer jerky.

    “Hurry,” Hillary pleaded. Lizzy pulled out the tomahawk with a grin, ripping the lining of her purse. She plucked at the tight pantyhose mid-thigh. She made shallow cuts holding the hose out. One layer, then two.

    “Now, Lizzy.” Hillary’s make-up was dripping off her face.

    Cutting through the last layer made mottled flesh explode forth like a pierced biscuit can.

    1. And now I’m hungry. Thanks, NutraSweet.

    2. Glorious.

    3. You wanna guest-write for me sometime? 😉

    4. And that, people, is how we do things here.

    5. I liked the tomahawk part. Very enlightened.

    6. I’m not sure whether to roflmao, or hurl, it’s a strange sensation I am feeling here…

      1. Did I give your brain an erection?

        1. more like a blood clot.

          1. Look for an 8-ball hemorrhage in one of your eyes.

    7. MMMmmmm…Pillsbury biscuits….

    8. The Necronomicon of Abdul Alhazred looses something when it’s translated from it’s original classical Arabic, which in itself was a translation from the Koine Greek.

      1. +1 Thing That Man Was Not Meant To Know

    9. I wonder if Stormfront keeps a list of porn actresses who have never done interracial scenes. Though highly tolerant myself, there is something about racist women that turns me on. Not just white women, but the chip on the shoulders of a black woman who thinks whites are devil heathens, and Asian princes too stuck up for the lesser races can be quite exciting just by their fiery and disdainful temperaments. Though I wouldn’t know what websites out there would have lists of the later two.

      1. Though I wouldn’t know what websites out there would have lists of the later two.

        I’ll send you an email with the hookups. Though the list of Asian “princes” in American porn is, what, two?

        1. Pretty much. I want ruthless bitches who find the body hair disgusting, and white dude musky smell barbaric.

          1. alanr643@gmail.com is my alternative* address.

            *That is on a noshared account – te he he

      1. Hey Warty, I was having trouble getting back on this site to get back to something you asked for earlier but I was too preoccupied to respond in a timely fashion. I just hope you didn’t think I was ignoring you.

    10. Does anyone know what the level of arousal below flaccid is called?

      1. “Frightened turtle”

    11. I’m glad I don’t eat lunch.

    12. Tim|2.19.14 @ 1:43PM|#

      If you post some Hillary on Elizabeth porn, I’ll probably shit myself. So go ahead, make my day…

      Hey, has anyone seen Tim? He was just here…

      1. He dropped his phone in the toilet.

        1. And you’re gonna pay for it.

    13. Elizabeth Warren, I may not be an actual Indian, but I wasn’t above sleeping with a few when I was in college.

    14. Fuck. I wont be able to get a hard on for a month. Goddammit.

    15. Cutting through the last layer made mottled flesh explode forth like a pierced biscuit can.


    16. “Pierced biscuit can” may be the greatest American prose since “Bitch better have my money….not some…not half….but all my muthafuckin cash..”

    17. Wow, it has been a while, Nutra-Sweet. I was starting to worry that you had become sane.

    18. And I was about to go to lunch. Ugh!

  21. dispel any idea that Jeb Bush might be the palooka to combat Mrs. Clinton.

    Wait a minute… why is everyone writing Biden off? What’s Biden, chopped liver?

    1. Give him a big hand folks, he’s here all week…

      1. In a just world, Hillary would have to read that aloud over and over again, on national TV, from prison.

    2. They have to first finish first black prez, then first female prez, then first gay prez, then first latino transvestite prez, etc., before they get to first retard prez. Old Joe will have missed the boat by that time.

  22. why is everyone writing Biden off? What’s Biden, chopped liver?

    Hillary has all the “good” donors locked down. She has sucked all the oxygen out of Biden’s run. Biden will die flapping and flopping like a goldfish dumped out of his bowl, gasping for air.

    I heard it on Morning Joke.

    1. I’d love to see Biden just decide “Fuck it, I’m taking this bitch down with me” during the primary debates.

      What does he have to lose? I doubt he’ll go back to the Senate or get a cabinet post, so it’s basically out to pasture with a book deal for him after 2016.

      1. He could reveal all the secrets he learned while serving in the administration!

        Like, uh, how to get bologna sandwiches from the White House cafeteria. Or what he overheard while *serving* the bologna sandwiches at Cabinet meetings.

      2. He’ll likely reveal something criminal that they both were involved in while she was at State.

        1. He would still be vice President and more or less immune from prosecution. Hillary in contrast will be citizen Hillary.

          1. Joe is dumb, but not so dumb, you know?

            1. Yeah. I think Joe has a bit of for lack of a better term, feral intelligence. He may be a moron with loose lips and poor impulse control, but I wouldn’t underestimate him.

              1. I don’t think he is stupid at all. He is wrong about a lot of things and seems to say shit without thinking sometimes, but that is not the same as stupid. Bush Jr. was the same in a way.

      3. I don’t think Biden will run. In a race without Clinton he probably would, but I suspect he’s not up to going up against the Clinton organization.

  23. Hillary in contrast will be citizen Hillary.

    I’ll bet that thought makes her blood run cold.

    1. You know it does.

  24. Rand tends to say things that pisses of libertarians, but If you consider mandatory minimum reforms, commercial hemp, his attempts to cock block drones and synthetic drug prohibition, he has actually done way more for libertarianism than Ron. I’m sure it all goes out the window once he gets executive power though.

    1. That pisses of libertarianism!

    2. I am optimistic about Rand’s chances. The GOP voters are ready for what he has to say. The leadership may hate him, but how many votes do they actually command? Not many I think.

    3. I’m sure it all goes out the window once he gets executive power though.

      That seems to be the way. Even the founders jumped off the liberty train as soon as they stepped into the presidency.

  25. Here is what the Democrats don’t get and why they will never have a successful populist as they are currently constituted. To be a populist you have to wear the hairshirt. You have to actually be a part of and identify with the population that you are supposedly representing. You can’t be a populist while holding down a half a million dollar a year job at Harvard Law and also picking up a few hundred grand on the side advising banks on how to screw their debtors. It doesn’t work. The Democrats are the party of trust fund babies, academia, public sector workers and various upper middle class soft skill workers. That is who they are. And more importantly, in the post Clinton era they transformed themselves into an aspirational party. They sell brand. The brand they sell is a way to show people that you are part of the intellectual and cultural elite. They have road that brand to two straight wins in Presidential elections. They can’t now turn around and claim to represent the common man. It doesn’t work that way. Moreover, their supporters are too in love with the previous brand and enjoy looking down their noses at anyone not in the brand to allow such a thing even if it were possible.

    1. Do not underestimate the ability of Democrats to swallow hypocrisy from people who say the right things. Remember, they celebrate Clinton and Ted Kennedy as heroes to women. They think Soros and Buffett are “for the people.”

      1. Principals trump principles.

      2. I have a neighbor who is a huge Warren supporter. She talks all of the populist talk. That is great and all except that she is a very highly paid labor union lawyer from a family that could afford to pay her entire way through Amherst and Harvard Law. The irony of her claiming to be a “populist” never dawns on her.

        You are correct in that people like my neighbor will latch onto the populist rhetoric and pretend it is their own. But they would vote Democrat anyway. But I fail to see how a populist message is going to gain them any votes or provide the kind of motivation to vote in the black community they need to win. Meanwhile, the message will totally flop with the actual working class whites and Hispanics it is meant to appeal to while at the same time depriving lots of aspirational whites of voting Democrat as a way to feel special and different.

    2. Sounds like you’re describing a fad. A mile wide and an inch deep.

      I wonder if we will ever see the Democrat party completely implode? So much of their voting block is based on petty tribal loyalties, and not any sense of shared ideas. Seems like such fragile coalition.

      1. I wouldn’t be surprised if it did. Most of their constituencies have interests that are completely at odds with one another. Hispanics and Blacks are both very socially conservative as a group. Blacks are very much for closing the borders. Upper class white feminists hate the social conservative values that most Blacks and Hispanics hold. The list of completely incompatible interests goes on and one.

        Really the group that gets screwed the worst and should be most angry are the blacks. They are the ones seeing their share of the population go down thanks to easily accessible abortion. They are the ones getting fucked over by the teachers’ unions. They are the ones seeing their jobs taken by Hispanics. And they are the ones who are most effected by and yet get no relief from the drug war even when Democrats are in power.

        There is a reason why the media spends so much time and energy portraying America as racist. It is the only thing that keeps blacks from collectively realizing how badly the Democrats are fucking them.

        1. That has to be the only reason any black guy would still vote democratic, and the only reason why stories like the Zimmerman case get national attention, and out cry, while stories of cops beating a homeless white guy to death does not.

          The democrat party has done nothing but fuck the black community over and over again, but can still get somewhere around 88% of their support, all because they, and the media are able to portray the Republicans as a bunch of racists and bigots.

          1. And it becomes a self fulfilling prophecy. Republicans never figure they have any chance at black votes. So they don’t even try to fight the perception or look out for the black communities interests. Meanwhile, the Democrats are free to completely take them for granted and put the interests of every other group in their coalition ahead of those of the black community.

            But remember, people like you and I are the racist ones. The media really cares about black people and protecting them from racists like you and me. They only help perpetuate a situation where blacks are completely taken for granted by both parties because they care so much.

            1. Republicans never figure they have any chance at black votes. So they don’t even try to fight the perception or look out for the black communities interests.

              Not really true. They sometimes do. But, for genuinely non-political reasons (they think they’re doing the right thing). As a result, they act like most people do when they’re acting out of genuine generosity – they don’t beat their chests about it.

        2. Why should blacks (or anyone) be angry about their “share” of the population going down? What difference does that make?

          1. It makes a big difference if you believe in the kind of tribalism the Democrats preach.

            1. Ah, that’s probably why I don’t get it.

              At this point I am utterly convinced that the main force keeping racism alive is people who see themselves as anti-racists, yet continue to insist that race is a very important thing that people should be concerned with. If Democrats are going to continue to treat poor blacks like idiot children, it’s not too surprising if some racist white asshole is reenforced in his belief that we’d be better off with the races separated.

              1. “Racism” is for the most part an issue among whites. It is basically a charge one group of whites hurls at another in an effort to feel superior and justify their continued control over that group.

                1. As a US political issue, definitely.

        3. Just so you know those socially conservative blacks and hispanics are also economic leftists. I’m an economic right-winger and I hate social conservatives.

  26. That picture of her should be captioned “Give me the power I need to crush your enemies!!”

    She is one of the few politicians out there who is openly, nakedly, in it for the power to crush her enemies. The money is a nice side benefit. The fame is irrelevant to her. She craves power. She is very, very dangerous.

    I saw a, predictably, hagiographic article about her on NBCNews.com a few months ago. “Happy warrior” “Beloved by her supporters”, all that. It discussed her work to regulate the banks. It also mentioned her “eager” search for industries that she considers “traditionally underregulated”, into which she could hook her claws. Very, very dangerous, despicable, sociopathic scum.

    1. And of course like all sociopaths, a complete hypocrite. She made a ton of money helping banks get around regulations and more money helping other clients use the bankruptcy laws to screw deserving creditors. On top of that she was a first rate slum lord.

      You are right that power is the most important thing. But Lizzie seems to have a healthy love for cash and high living as well.

      1. She had the hard left at “So you have a business. Good for you! But we need your money for ROADZ!”

        That infamous video set off the swooning for her, and shut off any attempt to critically analyze her actual record. Her ability to condescendingly recite 8th-grade civics lessons appeals to Progressives everywhere.

        One would hope that the scrutiny of a Presidential campaign would make it harder to hide her paper trail of hypocracy and favoritism. But, then again, Hillary.

        1. My half siblings are all a quarter native American. But since their biological father grew up in a time when having an Indian father was about the most socially unacceptable thing imaginable, he always denied the truth and the family was never put on any tribal rolls.

          I love nothing better than to get up a good bit of moral self righteousness and tell that story to any and every Warren lover I meet and explain how profoundly insulted I am that she would lie about being an Indian and take benefits meant for real Indians, especially where there are people who actually have Indian blood that are denied such benefits. They always get very quiet and change the subject of the conversation.

          Alynsky was right. There is nothing more effective than holding people to their own professed standards.

          1. My grandfather’s from Oklahoma – several geneartions of Okies. It was well established family lore that grandad’s grandma was Cherokee. Recent genetic tests have shown that that side of the family doesn’t actually have any Native American DNA (primary or mitochondrial). No one has been able to run down the origins of the generations old family lore. I empathize with your half-siblings, but I share the ‘family history’ experience with Warren.

            1. OK, but if you were asked, as someone who believed your family lore, to provide a recipe reflecting your ethnic heritage, would you send in a Crab with Mayonnaise recipe you clipped from the New York Times?

          2. She didn’t lie, she didn’t get any favors, there is nothing there, and she won the election. You people are absolutely shameless.

            1. She filled in “native american” on a college application form.

              I expect someone who claims to be qualified for office to be a little more rigorous about determining their ancestry than some one relying on family rumors.

    2. She is one of the few politicians out there who is openly, nakedly, in it for the power to crush her enemies. The money is a nice side benefit. The fame is irrelevant to her. She craves power. She is very, very dangerous.

      I told one of my buddies that she reminds me a lot of Caesar–an upper-class demagogue who manipulated populist sentiment in an effort to grab increasing amounts of power and authority. He so thoroughly discredited the republican form of government that Rome settled into an imperialist bureaucracy rather quickly after the Civil Wars ended.

      Every time I read a speech or article of hers, I think of Martin Sheen’s presidential candidate from The Dead Zone.

  27. The OWS pretty much checkmated themselves when they decided to vote for Obama no matter what.

    “Listen to us!! Or we will vote for the same people we would have voted for anyway!!!”

    1. It was to use an over used cliche, Kafkaesque. We actually had a protest movement claiming to want to overthrow the establishment but at the same time vowing to vote for and defend the most powerful elected official in the country.


        That’s why it rose so quickly and why it died so quickly.

        1. Of course it was AstroTurf. But that doesn’t make their claims any less ridiculous. They couldn’t even AstroTurf a rational protest movement.

        2. It was also stupid and pointless and had no particular goals, so it could only last so long.

          1. The astroturfers did have a goal: Student Loan Debt Relief, paid for via a Robin Hood Tax on securities trades.

            The debt relief motivated the unwashed masses to congregate, and the tax on trades is what the guys promoting the thing wanted.

            Much as a despise Buffett, I can’t help but admire the adroit way in which he hijacked the movement that was created to cut into his profits and turned it to drive more people to do lucrative trade with him.

        3. Meh, I’m not fond of the term “astroturf”. I think it would only be applicable to a movement where absolutely everyone was just a paid shill, which obviously wasn’t the case with OWS. I went to one of the protests, talked to people, and it was clear they were there because they believed in “the cause”, even though the definition of “the cause” varied wildly from person to person.

          The fact that it petered out so quickly is due mostly, I think, to their inability to both settle on any actually attainable goals or formulate an actual plan for accomplishing anything. Without that, nobody who isn’t an unemployed Bolshevik wannabe with nothing better to do isn’t going to remain interested very long.

          1. The people that you talked to were attracted to show up by a PR campaign that was pretty blatantly an astroturf one.

            Which is why when the funding strings were cut the movement collapsed so quickly; it wasn’t self organizing.

          2. OWS did not ‘peter out’. It was suppressed by coordinated police and DHS activity. Or did you miss the tear gas and riot police?

  28. No one, Nick, has written more “weak in the knees” pieces than you have for Rand Paul. In fact, I think you like the Smith piece because it too is weak in the knees for Paul.

    But I do note that Smith also says “It’s messy: the GOP would need to dispatch the polarizing and narcissistic Sen. Ted Cruz.”

    Of course, when Cruz was showing himself to be most polarizing and narcissistic, you were claiming he was the future of the Republican Party, so your thoughts as to the future of anything might need to be taken with a grain of salt.


    1. Remember Jackand, anyone who stands up and tries to change things is just being “polarizing”.

      1. Some issues need some polarizing, particularly radical change. Sometimes there is no middle way: you have to choose one way or the other.

        1. Yes. I love how establishment idiots like Smith throw that term around. Last I looked anyone who wants actual change or reform is going to be polarizing. If they weren’t, the change would have already happened. Saying you mustn’t be “polarizing” is just another way of saying you must support things as they are.

          1. On many issues, compromise means nothing ever changes.

      2. Yes putting down Obama for his supposed laxing (I don’t believe there has been) of federal marijuana laws is an example of trying to “change” something. I’d be dead if it weren’t for medicinal use of pot. Fuck Cruz with a wooden baseball bat then break it off and beat him with the rest of it.

      3. The jackass going by the similar handle is Tony with more words and about the same intelligence.

  29. Elizabeth Warren is a constant reminder of how god-awful most other Democrats are at explaining their own political beliefs.

    1. And, natch, you love you some lying fraud.

    2. To be fair, it’s kind of hard to put a good spin on bat-shit crazy economic creationism.

  30. my classmate’s step-aunt makes $66 /hour on the internet . She has been without a job for 7 months but last month her check was $19162 just working on the internet for a few hours. official website…..

  31. Too late, the masses have spoken. She’s it.

  32. Smith trains his sites sights on


  33. Appreciate all of the information here. Thanks.

  34. I dunno, most of the posters at NeoGaf (a video game forum, but very left leaning) seem super-excited by her, just like they were with Obama.

    She’d certainly energize the base far more than Hilary would.

    1. I’m more than a little familiar with NeoGAF. I wouldn’t suggest you (our anyone) take seriously the people you’re talking about. They represent an extreme, myopic, and insular left-leaning minority.

      It’s depressing how they’ve taken hold over there, though. Especially when it comes to the OT forums (and, sadly, the moderating policies, which have been getting less and less tolerant of non-PC speech.) I can’t bear to even browse the non-gaming threads anymore.

  35. I said it above, and Nick proves it in one day. Weak in the knees journalism is his domain, particularly on Rand Paul. Above he criticizes others for that, and it took him less than 24 hours to post his latest weak in the knees piece on Rand Paul.


Please to post comments

Comments are closed.