So... Elizabeth Warren is getting Gored.

[redqueen]

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=439&topic_id=2182259&mesg_id=2182259

I'm shocked. Shocked.


I actually am shocked that anyone fell for it. Or at least anyone here. Didn't we just learn this lesson already with Gore and the internet? And over and over ad nasueam since then?

The MSM counts on people reading the headline and little more. Damn our short attention spans.

[NYC_SKP]

1. Some readers know better and dismiss the misleading headlines out-of-hand...

...know that she would never say such a thing.

A few might read the article, then realize that.

And a few, as you suggest, gobble up the headline without questioning the source or the author:



Zeke, author of shit.

:hi:

[redqueen]

3. I fall into the first camp there...

it positively reeked of BS, and given that the MSM is what it is, well...

[JuniperLea]

2. Further proof

They have nothing.

[Warren DeMontague]

4. Except I think people, particularly the target audience, is hipper to that sort of thing now.

I don't think OWS is going to turn on a dime and go "$^$$^6s#$#@#$ing Elizabeth Warren! How dare she!"

It's a pathetic and biased misrepresentation of her words, but in the long run I don't think it will be a very big deal.

[CTyankee]

51. Oh, this calumny is not intended for the OWS. They know she's got them on her side.

I think it is aimed at the voters of MA. They already trotted out a bit of their strategy on Morning Joe today, Joe and Mika being so "disappointed" in Warren, gravely shaking their heads...

What they want to do is to cast doubt on her credibility.

I hope Rachel will set things straight. Somebody with a media voice has to...

[Warren DeMontague]

61. real good article in Vanity Fair on why they're all so scared of her

http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2011/11/elizabeth-warren-201111

[CTyankee]

62. Thanks. Read the whole thing. Lots of new info on her.

I think I'm even more impressed with her now...

[Pacifist Patriot]

5. For those of us who pop in and out, can you give us some context?

I have no clue what you're talking about.

[redqueen]

6. Oops! Sorry... this:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=439&topic_id=2182259&mesg_id=2182259

[Pacifist Patriot]

36. Thanks! Tempest meet teapot, eh?

[bluestate10]

46. The leading rightwing fishwrapper is the state claimed the Warren

claimed that she started OWS. Similar to the claim by the rightwing that Gore claimed that he started the internet. I am familiar with the rightwing shitwrapper that published the article, it is fully staffed by republican hacks.

[unblock]

7. does she sigh and wear earth tones?

:shrug:

[redqueen]

8. *If* she was the leader of this movment,

I'm sure they'd invest the resources to criticize her for such idiotic things.

This is what I'm referring to in the OP: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=439&topic_id=2182259&mesg_id=2182259

That's the problem for the MSM, where OWS is concerned. There is no leader to target and take down. No Michael Moore or Al Gore to smear, so that people immediately ignore them because of some MSM-created idiocy. They tried targeting and mocking the protesters themselves, but that seems not to have worked out so well for them.

[JI7]

32. judging by that thread a lot of people are falling for it

just by reading what was in the OP i knew she didn't say what the writer of the article claimed . but many people responded as if she had.

[redqueen]

34. Yeah, not exactly encouraging. (nt)

[Uncle Joe]

9. Kicked and recommended to expose more corporate media bullshit propaganda.

Thanks for the thread, redqueen.

[tosh]

13. Double that.

K&R.

[Luminous Animal]

10. Kick.

[WillyT]

11. K & R !!! - Thank You !!!

:hi:

:kick:

[mod mom]

12. I really believe that misleading headlines not based in fact should be removed.

It's shameful to attempt to tarnish such a fine candidate. :mad:

[Cowpunk]

57. Damn straight. Fight back now!

Zeke Miller at Business Insider is responsible for this bogus headline. Give him an earful.

e-mail: [e-mail]
AIM: zekejmiller
Work Phone: [phone]
SMS: [phone]

[sibelian]

14. It means one thing:

She is CREDIBLE.

[redqueen]

15. And they are DESPERATE to find a leader to take down.

Too bad, so sad. They're just gonna have to keep flailing.

Now that the cops and the armed forces are starting to see things OWS's way, things might start heating up a little bit. I hope not, but it would not surprise me at all.

[sibelian]

25. Yes, the force component of the state apparatus also turning against them

looks VERY bad for them. I have to say, I *was* surprised by that and I don't think they saw it coming at all.

[redqueen]

28. Some have expected it...

my conservative ex used to tell me that if it comes down to it, the enforcers will come around. I'm so glad to see that so far he seems to have been right about that. :)

[sibelian]

31. Really?!

that's a *very* interesting insight from the "other side". Respect to your ex (filtered as you see fit, of course...)

We can only hope it will spread.

[redqueen]

33. Yep.

He grew less and less conservative the longer we were together. :) He would deny he's conservative at all anymore but we disagree about that!

He figured if the cause was just, the enforcers would get behind it. I hope he continues to be proven right on this.

[Nye Bevan]

16. You can't get Gored if you don't say things like

"I created much of the intellectual foundation for what they do" (which she said about OWS). She should have known better.

[redqueen]

17. No, you can't get Gored with an unbiased third estate.

Unfortunately our MSM serves the oligarchy.

[Nye Bevan]

18. Agreed, but she knows that the press is biased

and that statements like that will be twisted and used against her.

She should have just said that she agrees wholeheartedly with OWS.

[redqueen]

21. Sorry, I won't join you in second guessing her.

As is pointed out below, we don't even have the entire context. I see absolutely no reason to try to find excuses to criticize her.

[Luminous Animal]

19. The Huffington Post's article gives the quote a little more context but not much.

They said that she was referring to academic research on consumer debt.

It would be really helpful if we were privy to the question asked and her full answer. But, like Al Gore inventing the internet, the context of the quote will be buried.


The intelligent thing to do would be to demand that the author provide the context. But that won't happen in this truthiness world.

[Fumesucker]

23. I have to agree, that was a slip up of the first order, it gave TPTB a way to paint her as elitist.

Very unfortunate phraseology on her part, a remarkably poor choice of words from someone who no doubt realized what she had said as soon as she uttered it.

She's far from stupid but no one is perfect, talk enough and you're going to say something dumb, most of us don't have hostile cameras pointing at us all day.

[Luminous Animal]

27. And yet another person who assumes to know the question she was asked and the context

of her quote. Apparently, she was referring only to her research in consumer dept.

"Warren also said that she supported the Occupy Wall Street protests. "I created much of the intellectual foundation for what they do," she added, referring to her academic research on consumer debt.

If only we were privy to both the question she was asked and the context of her answer. We won't be because then we couldn't be led by the nose by the right wing press from supplying knee jerk responses.

[Fumesucker]

The media videos you for hours and cuts out a few seconds to use..

Everyone knows that by now, I'm just a poor person who has never been interviewed and I know that..

If Warren said the words that were quoted in any context at all she was just giving the M$M something to run with against her.

As I said, if you talk a lot and have a camera pointed at you a lot you are sooner or later going to say something dumb on camera.

[Luminous Animal]

35. Indeed. We all need to watch what we say. Bullshit.

How about we do this instead... that all good liberal reject the right wing frame and demand truth over truthiness. That we cease being manipulated.

Free republic is all atwitter over this and, no surprise, so is DU.

[redqueen]

37. +1

[Fumesucker]

39. So I'm a Freeper now?

I'll thank you to keep your asparagus to yourself.

You're posting on this thread just like me, you're driving the "atwitter" just like I am.

If you don't like the subject then perhaps you should avoid it.

[Luminous Animal]

40. No, you are a DUer. Not once did I accuse you of being a Freeper.

[Fumesucker]

41. Nah, you just implied it..

A little touch of slippery rhetoric there grasshopper.

[Luminous Animal]

42. No, I did not. I stated a simple fact, both DUers and Freepers

are in a snit over her remarks. Members of both groups are condemning her for them. Both have fallen for the right wing frame. One willingly, the other reluctantly.

And one group is mocking her; the other is criticizing her for speaking "wrong".

I do not think you are a Freeper and I never said so. So fucking stop it.

[Fumesucker]

43. I'll say what I wish, I get posts deleted on a pretty regular basis now..

You tried to imply I was a Freeper and I called you on it, that's what's got your undies in a bunch.

Anyone who lived through "Al Gore said he invented the internet" knows full well that the media will distort even eminently true statements to make anyone they think might have whiff of liberalism look bad.

[Luminous Animal]

44. I will tell you again. I did not imply that you are a Freeper and

insisting that I did means that you flat out calling me a liar. I do not know why you are doing this but it is really fucked up. I know what I said and explained the difference that I perceive between DU's snit and FR's snit.

If it makes you feel better about yourself to peg me as a liar and ignore my words and hold dear to the fabricated disagreement that you are having then have at without me.

I've never put a person on ignore before but I've never had a person whom I have considered an ally treat me like such shit and totally disregard my intent.

[LanternWaste]

64. There a difference between inferring a thing and implying a thing...

There a preciese and relevant difference between inferring a thing and implying a thing...

[Nye Bevan]

29. Here's a good rule:

don't say anything that will make you look bad, even when it is taken out of context. Not easy I know, but when you are running for Senate you are playing in the big leagues.

[laureloak]

20. Don't let the media seize this conversation. Support Warren

if she contributed as stated. Do like the Repubs...pooh-pooh the gaff, laugh and DEFEND her....steer the conversation away from Warren and towards WALL ST!

[redqueen]

22. Precisely. (nt)

:)

[JoePhilly]

24. Won't work as well in this case ... because she supports the cause and is quite articulate on it.

The "Al Gore claims to have invented the internet" lies were harder too refute and fight against because it was in the end, a NON-ISSUE.

"The Internet" was not going to be a huge election issue ... and so it was hard for Gore to fight that LIE without wasting the time he needed to talk about other more pressing matters.

Warren should be able to take this LIE and use it to beat the crap out of the GOP ... she can say that she does not think she "created OWS", and then immediately say "But I WISH I DID!!!" ... she can go on to praise those in OWS, and then transition directly into an articulate description of how she agrees with them, and of how their efforts align with the Consumer Protection work.

And she can do so endlessly, because THIS is the key issue.

[redqueen]

26. Excellent point. (nt)

:thumbsup:

[CTyankee]

52. Very good point. She should turn it to her advantage and wax eloquent about

the beauty of people taking to the streets.

If people want to challenge her academic credibility, they can take it up with Harvard. If she fudged her data, that would be serious indeed. Methinks that is not the case.

[FarCenter]

30. Boston Globe - Elizabeth Warren says she ‘created intellectual foundation’ for Occupy Wall Street

movement.

http://www.boston.com/Boston/politicalintelligence/2011/10/elizabeth-warren-says-she-created-intellectual-foundation-for-occupy-wall-street-movement/eXimmRDbpeHoNBkKRmOsBL/index.html

[Schema Thing]

50. Cool!

She "started" it then.


Must have been while she took a breather from kicking Chuck Norris' ass.

[RandomKoolzip]

38. The media is guided by a double standard.

Herman Cain can get away with "Becky-becky-stan-stan."

Elizabeth Warren could never get away with that. She can't even get away with saying something entirely reasonable.

[bluestate10]

45. Warren is a tough, smart person. She will fight back. nt

[CoffeeCat]

47. That headline is a disgrace!!

She did not say that.

They probably stretched and misrepresented the quote that they did get from her.

I bet she simply said that she agreed with them, and has made the same intellectual
arguments for a long time.

What a crock.

The right wing (in particular the lunatic Glenn Beckers), will use this article to suggest
that the Obama Administration hatched OWS. Beck and others have attempted to assert this
for days now--hoping to fuel hate for OWS by co opting the hate that many Beck listeners
have for Obama--and cajoling them into pointing that hate toward OWS.

Can't have a united, informed country fighting against the powerful corporations that are
destroying our government and usurping our democracy, now can we? We must conquer by
division.

That headline needs to be nuked from orbit.

[Luminous Animal]

48. Gored, Acorned, Kerryed, Rev. Wrighted, Spitzered, Sherroded...

And like all of the above, liberals & Democrats are quick to condemn armed with information solely supplied by the right wing press.

My advice? Quit lapping Goebbels balls and stand up for your champions through both thick & thin.

[redqueen]

53. lol

@ your imagery... ew.

[Luminous Animal]

49. Kick because the DU post referenced in the OP has yet again reared its ugly head.

[Romulox]

54. First rule of PR: ADMIT mistake, MOVE ON.

Sandbagging/denying is a losing strategy.

[redqueen]

56. PR doesn't work when the corporate media has an agenda.

You cannot win by playing their game.

[Cowpunk]

58. No apology necessary

While I don't think Warren needs to address this just yet, I do think her supporters need to demand that the title of the article be changed immediately.

[Cowpunk]

55. Demand a retraction NOW! This is bullshit!

See my other post for contact info of the perpetrator:


http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=439&topic_id=2182259&mesg_id=2187630

[Luminous Animal]

60. I've sent an email. Thanks for that.

[Cowpunk]

59. Here we go. It has begun.

http://www.globalpost.com/dispatches/globalpost-blogs/macro/elizabeth-warren-created-occupy-wall-street

Elizabeth Warren created Occupy Wall Street?

No word on whether the Harvard prof and surging U.S. Senate candidate also invented the internet.


http://www.politickerny.com/2011/10/25/elizabeth-warren-says-she-started-occupy-wall-street (New York Observer)

Elizabeth Warren Says She Started Occupy Wall Street


http://www.christianpost.com/news/elizabeth-warren-founder-of-occupy-wall-street-movement-59422

Elizabeth Warren: Founder of Occupy Wall Street Movement?


http://www.embargozone.com/2011/10/25/elizabeth-warren-i-created-occupy-wall-street

Elizabeth Warren: I Created ‘Occupy Wall Street’


Right wing blogs are also repeating the headline as written, of course.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

63. Sadly there are DUers who are just as susceptible to the whims of the Corporate Media as

the average American.

It's sad, really.

She didn't say what they--and the wingnuts--accused her of saying.