« First « Previous Comments 6 - 8 of 8 Search these comments
Now there's nothing wrong with flipping houses but there IS something wrong when you slam banks for usury when you do it yourself!
You might want to look up the meaning of the word usury it involves charging high, unconscionable interest rates i.e credit cards, payday loans etc. something she has opposed, it does not involve high profits on speculative investments by individuals.
Now there's nothing wrong with flipping houses but there IS something wrong when you slam banks for usury when you do it yourself! It isn't normal to increase a price 56% in under two years let alone over 300% Heck why doesn't she run a show on the DiY network or HGTV if she was this good?
Why is the numbers for the NET increase in value is missing? How much was put into a house to increase it 300% in value? For all we know she could have lost money on the deal, although I doubt it.
How the heck is loaning at 9.5% usury. That was pretty close to the going rate in the 80's. You don't have a clue what usury means.
Now there's nothing wrong with flipping houses but there IS something wrong when you slam banks for usury when you do it yourself! It isn't normal to increase a price 56% in under two years let alone over 300% Heck why doesn't she run a show on the DiY network or HGTV if she was this good?
Ironic isnt it! Yea.. slamming the banks, but it still feels many believe that 20-50% appreciation is the norm.
« First « Previous Comments 6 - 8 of 8 Search these comments
http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2012/05/31/elizabeth_warren_acknowledges_telling_harvard_penn_of_native_american_status/?p1=News_links
This comes from the Boston Globe. Not exactly a right wing paper in Mass..if you want that read the Herald. The NY Times owns this paper and that isn't to the right either.
Warren is either lying or she's being very forgettable about what she is saying.
“At some point after I was hired by them, I . . . provided that information to the University of Pennsylvania and Harvard,'' she said in a statement issued by her campaign. “My Native American heritage is part of who I am, I'm proud of it and I have been open about it.''
Warren's statement is her first acknowledgment that she identified herself as Native American to the Ivy League schools. While she has said she identified herself as a minority in a legal directory, she has carefully avoided any suggestion during the last month that she took further actions to promote her purported heritage."
OK so she said it but didn't press it
"When the issue first surfaced last month, Warren said she only learned Harvard was claiming her as a minority when she read it in the Boston Herald."
Um..so which is it. Did she list it or not?
"The official further said that Warren had been unable to answer questions about the issue before now because she had forgotten many of the details and had asked her campaign to thoroughly review the evidence. T"
If you work for a Ivy League school shouldn't you remember how you were hired?
"In a May 2 interview with the Globe, Warren suggested that she did not list her ethnicity on applications because she was personally recruited by the universities where she taught."
Again so which is it. Ok alright well she couldn't have possible listed herself as white to prior employers...right? If she is consistant about her background then this really shouldn't be an issue.
"Before Warren's time in the Ivy League - in the early 1980s - she indicated on an official University of Texas form that she was white. She also had the option to indicate Native American heritage at that point, but did not check that box."
O sweet Lord. So she sudden decides she's part Native American when she works at a Ivy League school..how odd.
Well what does the school say about this?
"Professor Charles Fried, who sat on the committee that recruited Warren, reiterated to the Globe on Wednesday that he was unaware of Warren's minority status when she was hired. He said that the committee never discussed it and that he does not consult the legal directory in which Warren had listed herself as a minority.
However, Fried acknowledged Wednesday to the Globe, it seemed strange that the issue of her heritage would not come up during the hiring process since she was recruited in the early 1990s, when the school was under intense pressure to diversify its faculty."
Could she have been pressured to change her background by Harvard? That isn't totally clear and besides there would be other professors by now with stories of such.
If this was the Boston Herald or the local Fox station it could be construed as a right wing attack. Once the Boston Globe picks up a story here it makes it non partisan.
It should be noted that this race unlike others in the country has a general agreement about negative ads.
http://www.nonprofitquarterly.org/policysocial-context/20407-why-hasnt-the-brown-warren-pac-pact-caught-on.html
The convention in this weekend. If she doesn't identify as to why she changed how she identified herself then this just looks worse. Meanwhile she neglected that she hasn't actually won the primary yet. If these questions dog her over the summer and she loses the primary then mounting a independent campaign with only two months left will be next to impossible. She has been illustrating a pattern of behavior of not paying attention.
Brown has generally been airing ads about how he has been bipartisan and faces no real challenge in the primary. Warren hasn't sold her self specifically on what she has done to service the state. Browns record goes back decades. Once again the left puts someone up because they think she/he is "cool" instead of looking at a record with accomplishments.