• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Karl Rove lies about Elizabeth Warren in attack ads

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Ausm said:
So having Warren in who would work for the people unlike Mr. Wall Street is a bad think in your book? ooooook.
Click to expand...

Why do you think that Warren would work for the people? Because she is from the opposite party?

Or that she said that she will toe the Democratic party line and not be beholden to any corporate interests?
 
thraashman said:
Well, Craig didn't supply a link so I can't verify that his claims are true (he's very partisan but rarely outright lies in his posts). But either she's a radical anti-bank socialist or she's a tool of Wallstreet (in truth I'm betting she's more moderate than either claim). But those are pretty opposite claims. So he either lied one time, the other, or both. There's no "he was honest the whole time" option, it's simply not possible.

Rove doesn't exactly have a record of being mister honest and neutral. He's one of the biggest douchebags out there I'd say.
Click to expand...
I did a quick search and couldn't figure out exactly what the lie was. This appears to be just another typical smear ad to me...the kind commonly used by both parties using bits of truth to distort and smear their opposition.

Do you have links that clearly show this alleged lie? Or is this just another case of partisan hypersensitivity and hypocrisy?
 
Doc Savage Fan said:
I actually read that article before posting in this thread. Warren says Rove was factually wrong...but I did not see any facts to substantiate her allegation.
Click to expand...

Two ads, one claiming she's an anti-business, anti-banking leftist radical associated with the OWS movement, and a second, claiming that she's in the back pocket of Wall Street. At least one has to be false.
 
woolfe9999 said:
Two ads, one claiming she's an anti-business, anti-banking leftist radical associated with the OWS movement, and a second, claiming that she's in the back pocket of Wall Street. At least one has to be false.
Click to expand...
You logic eludes me. I see no reason why she couldn't be an OWS supporter as well as in the back pocket of Wall Street...such hypocrisy is not uncommon among politicians.

Is there something factually incorrect with this ad?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tNxez4ddpa0&feature=player_embedded

I couldn't find the ad saying she was in the back pocket of Wall Street. Please post link if you have one. Thanks.
 
thraashman said:
Well, Craig didn't supply a link so I can't verify that his claims are true (he's very partisan but rarely outright lies in his posts).
Click to expand...

Excuse me? Define 'partisan'. Rather idiotic word thrown around that way.

More importantly, what do you mean 'rarely'? Point me to one 'outright lie' ever here, or apologize, if you have any integrity, which is now in question.

But either she's a radical anti-bank socialist or she's a tool of Wallstreet (in truth I'm betting she's more moderate than either claim). But those are pretty opposite claims. So he either lied one time, the other, or both. There's no "he was honest the whole time" option, it's simply not possible.
Click to expand...

Which is a point I was making.

Rove doesn't exactly have a record of being mister honest and neutral. He's one of the biggest douchebags out there I'd say.
Click to expand...

Oh, you're so partisan. Criticizing a political whore who is one of the most powerful opponents of the public will and democracy in this country.
 
Doc Savage Fan said:
You logic eludes me. I see no reason why she couldn't be an OWS supporter as well as in the back pocket of Wall Street...such hypocrisy is not uncommon among politicians.

Is there something factually incorrect with this ad?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tNxez4ddpa0&feature=player_embedded

I couldn't find the ad saying she was in the back pocket of Wall Street. Please post link if you have one. Thanks.
Click to expand...

The ad is associating her with violence and/or publicly unruly behavior that she has never engaged in or supported. When she says that her work is part of the intellectual foundation of that movement, she is referring to her substantive political stances, not her advocacy of any of the things that the ad complains about. She supports prosecution of Wall Street criminals, so she's responsible for the fact that some people who also advocate prosecuting Wall Street criminals have done bad things while protesting? Sure. It's pretty bottom of the barrel, even as political attack ads go.

The other one is hardly any better. It mentions her being appointed to oversee the TARP apportionments, but she was critical of Wall Street the entire way through and most importantly, her role was to observe and report to Congress. She had no power to alter policy, only to draft reports, advise and recommend. Moreover, her toughest recommendations were not adopted by Congress. The ad creates an impression is that is essentially 180 degrees opposite of the truth.
 
Last edited:
Craig234 said:
First, Rove - whose organization is one of the few biggest in steering corporation donations to Republican campaign advertising - put out an attack ad on Warren (a year before the election) attacking her as a 'radical' anti-bank socialist. That hit its mark in the idiot demographic and her negative rating tripled from 9% to 27%.

Not good enough, he just released a second ad. This one paints her as the tool of Wall Street, a crony of big banks who was involved in the TARP bank bailouts.

One thing is clear in this campaign - Wall Street's #1 guy in Congress is Scott Brown, and Elizabeth Warren is probably their biggest enemy.

To call her a 'tool of Wall Street', supporting the actual tool, Scott Brown, is just absurd.

It's hard to believe anyone could fall for these lies, but sadly, polls suggest that we do have that ignorant of voters (especially many 'centrists'.)
Click to expand...

The vast majority of people do not have the time nor the desire to verify what they are told in 30 second TV ads. That is why attack ads, especially ones right before elections (on the local level at least, not giving the opponent enough time to respond) are so effective.

That is also why we are in our current situation with two horrible parties running our country.
 
monovillage said:
Well, it looks like good ole nasty Elizabeth Warren also lied about her heritage to get a job. It deserves it's own thread, but I thought I'd resurrect a craig234 thread just for fun.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0512/75960.html

http://bostonherald.com/news/region..._officials_touted_her_native_american_lineage
Click to expand...

So, both articles you link defend her claim of heritage. It's pointed out that she never put her ancestry at the forefront for any jobs. It's never mentioned any dishonesty on her part. It's mentioned in both articles that her knowledge of her native american ancestry is from oral history from her family and from what I can tell the only refutation is that her ancestors didn't claim non-white on census forms. And to you this is her lying to get a job?

I bring you conservative logic people ... or more appropriately, the lack thereof. This is literally the level of logic of all of monovillage's posts in P&N. Claim something completely untrue and hope no one bothers to read for themselves.
 
Seems amazing to me that with Rove's track record as a proven liar beyond any stretch of the imagination, there still are folks who would defend him and his lying and try to act sincere about it.

Geeeez Louise.....puh-leeeez.😀
 
Here's her Indian Ancestry in graphical form. She's 1/32 Native American.

http://thevimh.blogspot.com/2012/05/what-does-132nd-look-like.html]What Does 1/32nd Look Like?

She's a 1 percenter too.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/mil... a Wealthy Individual Who Owns a Lot of Stock

“I realize there are some wealthy individuals – I’m not one of them, but some wealthy individuals who have a lot of stock portfolios,“ Warren said on ”The Last Word with Lawrence O’Donnell.”

The issue with that statement is that Warren — who’s running against Republican Scott Brown — could be worth as much as $14.5 million, Buzzfeed pointed out. Financial disclosure forms show she and her husband own between $100,001 and $250,000 of IBM stock, and between $2.8 million and $7.9 million in TIAA-CREF funds, the Boston Globe reported. A Harvard professor, Warren earned about $700,000 last year, including book royalties and consulting fees, and lives in a house worth $5 million.
Click to expand...
 
thraashman said:
So, both articles you link defend her claim of heritage. It's pointed out that she never put her ancestry at the forefront for any jobs. It's never mentioned any dishonesty on her part. It's mentioned in both articles that her knowledge of her native american ancestry is from oral history from her family and from what I can tell the only refutation is that her ancestors didn't claim non-white on census forms. And to you this is her lying to get a job?

I bring you conservative logic people ... or more appropriately, the lack thereof. This is literally the level of logic of all of monovillage's posts in P&N. Claim something completely untrue and hope no one bothers to read for themselves.
Click to expand...

You'd better hope no one reads it for themselves, since it's bullshit. She claimed it as her heritage, and Harvard also claimed her and stated so which she never denied.
Of course you want no one to read it.
They can read this article instead.....where she admits she listed it herself.
http://www.bostonherald.com/news/politics/view.bg?articleid=1061128808
 
Last edited:
tweaker2 said:
Seems amazing to me that with Rove's track record as a proven liar beyond any stretch of the imagination, there still are folks who would defend him and his lying and try to act sincere about it.

Geeeez Louise.....puh-leeeez.😀
Click to expand...

Like she was lying about her "heritage" to get the job?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top