Most Read
    Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

    New Challenge to Boston Phoenix: Demand Elizabeth Warren and Harvard put up, or shut up about “right-wing smear machine”

    New Challenge to Boston Phoenix: Demand Elizabeth Warren and Harvard put up, or shut up about “right-wing smear machine”

    This is too funny.  David Bernstein, a writer at The Boston Phoenix, previously warned that the “right-wing smear machine” was coming to get Elizabeth Warren.  I offered a Challenge to Boston Phoenix: Defend Elizabeth Warren on Cherokee issue, or drop “right-wing smear machine” accusation.

    Bernstein never met the challenge, and instead now has issued his own challenge issued last week, Hey, What Happened To The E-Dubs Fraud Story?

    It’s now been a month since I wrote about irresponsible national right-wing smear reporting on Elizabeth Warren. As you might recall, the article centered primarily on charges of academic fraud, and also told of attacks on a Warren staffer. Several of the smearers I mentioned fired back, preposterously claiming that my article was really about the Cherokee heritage controversy; I responded, telling them essentially to put up or shut up about the actual smears in the article.

    As I say, it’s been a month. I’d have to conclude that the answer has been “shut up.”

    I’m not aware of any subsequent reporting, commentary, or reiteration of either of those two smears since my article appeared — certainly not at, the Washington Free Beacon, or Legal Insurrection, which were the ones peddling them most prominently before.

    Most notable is the Breitbart site’s silence, where we still await parts 3 and 4 of the promised 4-part series by Michael Patrick Leahy about the big Warren scientific fraud scandal. Part 1 ran on June 11; Part 2 on June 25.

    Bernstein has impeccable timing, because Leahy has just published another devastating article on problems with Warren’s academic background, Harvard Knew Elizabeth Warren Was a Poor Scholar When They Hired Her:

    When Harvard Law School offered Elizabeth Warren a tenured faculty position in February 1993, administrators at the school knew that her scholarship had been criticized harshly. Between 1989 and 1991, three leading academic experts on bankruptcy wrote devastating critiques of the 1989 book she co-authored with Teresa Sullivan and Jay Westbrook, As We Forgive Our Debtors: Bankruptcy and Consumer Credit in America. The reviews, published in highly respected academic journals, belied claims made at the time of her hiring by Harvard Law School Dean Robert C. Clark that her work reflected “excellent scholarship” and by Appointments Committee member Professor Charles Fried that she was “at the very top of her profession as a scholar.” ….

    Any concerns that Ms. Warren and her supporters had that Shuchman’s allegations and the other highly critical academic reviews of her work would hurt her chances of being hired by Harvard Law School soon washed away. Indeed, there is no evidence that Dean Clark, Professor Charles Fried, or any member of the Appointments Committee made any reference to the three critical academic publications when they made their presentation on Ms. Warren’s qualifications to the full faculty….

    Read the Leahy article, is it full of details about the serious criticisms of Warren’s academic record at the time of her Harvard appointment and the strong evidence that the full record was not presented to the full faculty. Of course, if Harvard would release its full file on Warren, we could resolve who said what to whom, or who didn’t say what to whom, conclusively.

    The Boston Phoenix should be challenging Elizabeth Warren and Harvard to put up, not demanding that the “right-wing smear machine” do it for her. So there’s my new challenge to Bernstein and The Boston Phoenix:

    If you really want the truth about Elizabeth Warren’s hiring by Harvard and the contemporaneous allegations regarding her scholarship, how about you demand a release of all Harvard’s files?


    Donations tax deductible
    to the full extent allowed by law.


    1. The accusations of defective scholarhip help explain why Warren placed her agency in the Fed, free of normal checks and balances.

    2. Warren would have made a heckuva AGW climatologist, but I’m pretty sure that Rutgers law school is easier than their STEM programs, and law probably pays better.

    3. MA Senator for Life Teddy Kennedy was expelled from Harvard for cheating. That made no difference to Harvard when they readmitted him, nor to MA voters. Neither did Chappaquidick. Nor did other rumored scandals that never fully saw the light of day.

    There’s a symmetry there, no? Kennedy expelled for cheating; wannabe successor Warren allegedly hired via cheating.

    4. I keep saying that what could turn the race is a pocketbook issue. Without that it’s a toss-up with, IMHO, an edge to Warren though I wouldn’t bet on it.

    I’m not deprecating the efforts of LI and others. Without them, the race would be a cakewalk for Warren. Like Ted Kennedy, Warren may be getting an unsavory reputation that will keep her out of national office.

    5. Another thing that might change the race is Brown mending fences with the Tea Party, without which he probably would not have been elected. Unfortunately, he seems to be too much in love with the awesomely awesome awesomeness of his awesome self to do so. No, Scott, the Mike Bloomberg endorsement is no substitute.

    6. As I was finishing this comment, I got a fundraising call from the Brown campaign. I said I’m not in the Tea Party though I share many of their goals. I went on that Brown owes his position to activists who worked their hearts out on his behalf, and he deserves to lose for the way he has treated them.

    Maybe such whacks with the clue bat will register on Senator Wonderful before it’s too late.

    Note to self: make similar replies to Brown emails.

    I just realized something after looking through the bookshelves on my wall:

    My Bankruptcy Casebook was co-authored by Elizabeth Warren.

    It’s “The Law of Debtors and Creditors: Text, Cases, and Problems” written by Elizabeth Warren and Jay Lawrence Westbrook (5th Ed.) 2006.

    I now understand why I made some of the notes in the margins about how the authors were out of their minds regarding with regard to certain suggestions about how to reform the bankruptcy process and that claimed inequities between employers/corporations and workers/junior creditors were not the way that the authors represented them in business practice.

      Ragspierre in reply to Chuck Skinner. | August 6, 2012 at 12:56 pm

      Deemocrat strategerists wonder if having Princess Running Bare speak at the convention is wise.


      Also, since I do simple consumer bankruptcy as part of my practice, I know that the Warren claims about “medical bankruptcy” are BS. At least here in Texas.

        gs in reply to Ragspierre. | August 6, 2012 at 1:38 pm

        Americans are (still) optimists. Warren strikes me as negative, nagging and unlikable. She is a good fit for the “progressive” Left, but I don’t think she will play well in Peoria. IMO she will make an even bigger phony out of herself if she acts like an optimist.

        “I wish we could buy Elizabeth Warren some air time,” said Republican strategist Bruce Haynes of Purple Strategies. “You know, she may be a good fit for Massachusetts, but she’s a bad fit for the rest of the country.”

        He gets it.

        2. Cautionary note: At first blush I wouldn’t expect Warren to appeal to MA white ethnics, but her attacks on Wall Street might dog-whistle to the Boston area’s resentment of NYC.

        Hi Rags,

        You have to remember Elizabeth Warren’s definition of “Medical Bankruptcy.” According to her, ANY debt over $1,000 created by a medical procedure or illness was a “medical bankruptcy” of that family unit, regardless of if that family or individual went on to actually declare bankruptcy.

        We both know it’s horse manure, but it’s how she framed the debate, and no one called her on it until they were all arguing about the statistics she used, when they should have argued the underlying premise was wildly over-broad.

        You know what I would love to see would be the Republican National Committee purchase a national advertisement during the Convention between Elizabeth Warren and Bill Clinton speeches saying:

        “Elizabeth Warren believes that frauds and thieves shouldn’t get ahead. What she won’t tell you is she fraudulently claimed to be a Native American to get a job at Harvard, even though she didn’t have one shred of proof of Native American Ancestry. If she’s willing to lie to her employers to steal a job by lying about her Diversity status, what makes you think she won’t lie to you?

        Don’t reward her lies. Don’t vote for Elizabeth Warren.”

        Can you imagine the uproar? But it would be fantastic to watch.

    Justin | August 6, 2012 at 1:19 pm

    Her full files are being redacted and destroyed as we speak.

    […] Cherokee Woman Supporter Steps In It Again Posted on August 6, 2012 3:30 pm by Bill Quick » New Challenge to Boston Phoenix: Demand Elizabeth Warren and Harvard put up, or shut up about “… […]

    Leave a Comment

    Leave a Reply

    You must be logged in to post a comment.

    Notify me of followup comments via e-mail (or subscribe without commenting.)

    Font Resize
    Contrast Mode
    Send this to a friend