Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

The Supreme Court cannot be allowed to become the ultimate, unaccountable arbiter of everything.

It’s always darkest before the other shoe drops.

Since we are repeating ourselves, let me just say fuck that.

You are either for trump or for democracy. Pick one.

Is it negotiation when the other party actually wants to shoot the hostage?

Is it irresponsible to speculate? It is irresponsible not to.

Never give a known liar the benefit of the doubt.

They fucked up the fucking up of the fuckup!

Republicans don’t lie to be believed, they lie to be repeated.

When someone says they “love freedom”, rest assured they don’t mean yours.

Good lord, these people are nuts.

You can’t attract Republican voters. You can only out organize them.

Sadly, media malpractice has become standard practice.

This must be what justice looks like, not vengeful, just peaceful exuberance.

If you voted for Trump, you don’t get to speak about ethics, morals, or rule of law.

We are builders in a constant struggle with destroyers. keep building.

One lie, alone, tears the fabric of reality.

Their freedom requires your slavery.

An almost top 10,000 blog!

Hey Washington Post, “Democracy Dies in Darkness” was supposed to be a warning, not a mission statement.

Washington Post Catch and Kill, not noticeably better than the Enquirer’s.

When they say they are pro-life, they do not mean yours.

The republican caucus is covering themselves with something, and it is not glory.

When you’re a Republican, they let you do it.

You are here: Home / Economics / C.R.E.A.M. / Elizabeth Warren & the Power of Rhetoric

Elizabeth Warren & the Power of Rhetoric

by | 68 Comments

This post is in: , , ,

Kay’s post on sloganeering for the media made me take another look at a couple recent articles about Elizabeth Warren’s latest appearance before the House. Paul Krugman summarizes the War on Warren:

Last week, at a House hearing on financial institutions and consumer credit, Republicans lined up to grill and attack Elizabeth Warren, the law professor and bankruptcy expert who is in charge of setting up the new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. Ostensibly, they believed that Ms. Warren had overstepped her legal authority by helping state attorneys general put together a proposed settlement with mortgage servicers, which are charged with a number of abuses.
__
But the accusations made no sense. Since when is it illegal for a federal official to talk with state officials, giving them the benefit of her expertise? Anyway, everyone knew that the real purpose of the attack on Ms. Warren was to ensure that neither she nor anyone with similar views ends up actually protecting consumers.
__
And Republicans were clearly also hoping that if they threw enough mud, some of it would stick. For people like Ms. Warren — people who warned that we were heading for a debt crisis before it happened — threaten, by their very existence, attempts by conservatives to sustain their antiregulation dogma. Such people must therefore be demonized, using whatever tools are at hand…

Andy Kroll at Mother Jones points out that Warren has all the right enemies in the business world as well — the Wall Street Journal‘s slogan-intensive attacks on Warren are being written by a former Goldman Sachs banker.

But it was Dana Milbank, semi-reformed Media Village Insider, who picked up the Useful Catchphrase:

It seems everybody is afraid of Elizabeth Warren, the Harvard law professor charged by President Obama with setting up the new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.
__
The Wall Street Journal editorial page called her “President Warren” and a “czar” in command of an “empire.” Richard Shelby of Alabama, the top Republican on the Senate banking committee, thinks she’s orchestrating a “regulatory shakedown” of mortgage companies. And Spencer Bachus, chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, told Warren on Wednesday that she is “probably directing the most powerful agency that’s ever been created in Washington.” That will come as news to the Pentagon.
__
But in the tradition of Chief Justice John Roberts, who described himself to lawmakers as a lowly “umpire,” Warren declared herself to be a mere sheriff’s deputy.
__
“If there had been a cop on the beat with the authority to hold mortgage services accountable a half-dozen years ago,” she announced, “the problems in mortgage servicing would have been exposed . . . long before they became a national scandal.”
__
Warren added: “We need a cop on the beat that American families can count on. It is critical that we get this right – a real cop on the beat.”
__
“You kept saying ‘cop on the beat, cop on the beat,’ ” complained Rep. Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.), who chaired the day’s hearing.
__
Warren could not dispute this. In reply, she said that banks must know “there will be a cop on the beat” and that her agency will need “enough money to put enough cops on the beat.” Before completing her testimony, Officer Warren made four more references to cops-on-beats – possibly putting her in violation of public-nuisance statutes.
__
But it was a useful metaphor: If she’s the cop, then banks are the robbers, and members of the Republican majority on the committee sounded like lawyers for the accused.

I’ve been on Team Warren for quite some time, and the fact that she’s driving the Repubs (even more) bonkers using their favorite rhetorical weapons is just one more vindication, yes?

Reader Interactions

68Comments

  3. 3.

    Phil Perspective

    I’ve been on Team Warren for quite some time, and the fact that she’s driving the Repubs (even more) bonkers using their favorite rhetorical weapons is just one more vindication, yes?

    Yes, yes, yes, yes, yes!!!! 10 times, yes!

  4. 4.

    RalfW

    More of this, dammit. We’ve been robbed blind, beaten and left for dead. I’d say some cops are called for. And ones that can still bargain collectively, thank you.

  5. 5.

    Brachiator

    I’ve been on Team Warren for quite some time, and the fact that she’s driving the Repubs (even more) bonkers using their favorite rhetorical weapons is just one more vindication, yes?

    Absolutely.

    And this is one of those areas where I has a happy that Obama stuck with Warren despite powerful attempts by Republicans to keep her out of the Administration.

  8. 8.

    a hip hop artist from Idaho (fka Bella Q)

    I’ve been on Team Warren for quite some time, and the fact that she’s driving the Repubs (even more) bonkers using their favorite rhetorical weapons is just one more vindication, yes?

    Absofuckinglutely.

  9. 9.

    trollhattan

    Loved it when Jon Stewart confessed he wanted to make out with her.

    Is this our “Because she drivez Republicans Krazy” moment? When used by Republicans, it’s generally intended to divert attention from the vast shortcomings of the craze-maker du jour.

  10. 10.

    Maude

    The Repubs don’t like Warren because the people around the country understand what she is talking about.

  11. 11.

    BGinCHI

    She has credibility and brains. It’s a wonder the Senators could even understand her.

  13. 13.

    Brachiator

    @The Sheriff’s A Ni-:

    I see what you did there.

    Huh?

    By the by, I hope that Obama can nominate an equally frightening Commerce Secretary to replace Gary Locke, and would dearly like to see Hilda Solis replaced with someone who was more like Francis Perkins. Or Elizabeth Warren.

  14. 14.

    geg6

    Elizabeth Warren is the most awesome public servant, perhaps ever but surely right now. She’s whip smart and very funny in her appearances on Real Time, where it’s obvious that Bill Maher has a crush on her. Hell, so do I. I’d totally go gay for her. Love, love, love her.

  15. 15.

    jayjaybear

    “These old Wall Street boys are putting up an awful fight to keep the government from putting a cop on their corner.” – Will Rogers

  16. 16.

    Zifnab

    Warren could not dispute this. In reply, she said that banks must know “there will be a cop on the beat” and that her agency will need “enough money to put enough cops on the beat.” Before completing her testimony, Officer Warren made four more references to cops-on-beats – possibly putting her in violation of public-nuisance statutes.

    Wasn’t DougJ complaining about the damnable talking point and its habit of playing to the lowest common denominator just a few posts back?

    I hope “Cop-on-the-beat” gets its own tag line. We could use more Elizabeth Warren posts. That woman never fails to make me smile.

  18. 18.

    Elizabelle

    Annie: good post. Reading Kay’s thread on messaging, I thought about Elizabeth Warren too and her effective — but not simplistic — prowess in communicating.

    I am dreaming a little of Obama-Warren 2012 — use the second term to clean up the banksters’ mess and ensure it does not happen again.

    Wondering if rather than sidelining, administration has been saving her.

  20. 20.

    Elizabelle

    PS: nothing against Joe Biden. He’s effing great.

    But Elizabeth Warren is a force of nature.

  21. 21.

    Comrade Mary

    Looking at everyone squealing and sighing above (and I’m with you, guys and gals, I’m with you), I can’t help but think that Warren is a Bieber for grownups.

    Please don’t ever cut your hair, Liz. I’m not afraid that you’ll lose your power or anything — are you kidding? — but I just think it looks really, really nice on you.

    #makes international sign for “call me”#

  24. 24.

    geg6

    @Barb (formerly Gex):

    Heh. Looks like pretty much all of Balloon Juice is madly in love with her. A rare moment of concensus. We should all hold hands and sing Kumbaya or something. Doesn’t happen often that this crowd squeals with delight like tween girls at a Bieber concert. Which just another reason EW is fucking awesome.

  25. 25.

    Mark S.

    What’s amazing to me is that she is controversial because she doesn’t suck our Galtian Lords’ cocks and genuflect at the altar of Capitalism every time she talks. She actually doesn’t say anything controversial to non-billionaire bankers, but our bought-and-sold Congress finds her terrifying.

  26. 26.

    Martin

    Dems would do well to pick up this ‘cop on the beat’ line and apply it to all regulatory actions.

  27. 27.

    brucds

    Read this great piece from Rortybomb – 3/18 – Warren is bringing clarity, forthrightness and a razor-sharp intellect to the consumer protection front. She scares the bejeezus out of these jerks… (Also – there’s a great chart that shows how the new agency simplifies an absurdly tangled net of regulators – which seems designed to make them ineffectual.)

    http://rortybomb.wordpress.com/2011/03/18/the-bizarre-smear-campaign-on-elizabeth-warren-continues/

    http://titanicsailsatdawn.blogspot.com/2011/03/smear-campaign-against-elizabeth-warren.html

  29. 29.

    Comrade Mary

    @AhabTRuler: Squeee! Thanks! You know, that’s one of my favourite songs, but I never saw the video before. (Probably because I was 33 when it came out, MuchMusic had almost given up on videos, the Net was barely a gleam in our collective eyes, and I thought I was old. Idjit.)

  33. 33.

    TomG

    “Anyway, everyone knew that the real purpose of the attack on Ms. Warren was to ensure that neither she nor anyone with similar views ends up actually protecting consumers.”

    This quote reminds me of the scene in The Incredibles where Bob Parr is castigated by his boss (in an insurance company) because he has been secretly helping the insured navigate their way through the complex rules set up so that the company won’t actually have to pay out any legitimate claims.

  34. 34.

    a hip hop artist from Idaho (fka Bella Q)

    @Mark S.:

    She actually doesn’t say anything controversial to non-billionaire bankers, but our bought-and-sold Congress finds her terrifying.

    That’s the wonderful garnish for this whip smart, wonked out yet still a great communicator, average looking woman. She is everything I always wanted to grow up to be.

  35. 35.

    freelancer

    @Mark S.:

    Holy Crap, that is awesome. There needs to be a Balloon Juice ambush at the bottom of that thread, screaming, “The DFH’s have been saying it over and over and over again. This is what happens when you vote Republican. -Signed, a shitload of former Republican voters.”

  36. 36.

    Barb (formerly Gex)

    @freelancer: The difference being, once these guys get the TP to back off their issue, they’ll be right back on board with going after what everyone else has.

  37. 37.

    Rainy Day

    I watched the hearings, and I kept wishing/hoping Elizabeth would say something like, “It’s simple. The CFPB is going to be like Amazon, except with more teeth and greater enforcement of honesty. You’ll be able to pick and choose the financial product you want based upon an outline of costs/benefits and other customer reviews. The CFPB doesn’t care what you do with the credit you get; we only care that you get all the information you need, that you understand the payments required, and that you can afford the payments. If you can’t afford the payments, you’ll have to go through some more hoops to prove you fully understand the indebtedness you’re willing to take on and/or that you have backers to cover your indebtedness. And, let me remind you, this is for PERSONAL debt only. Business debt/credit is under a difference umbrella.”

  39. 39.

    Canadian Observer

    Brilliant editorial from People’s Daily:

    “How ‘Humanitarian’ Is Western Intervention in Libya?

    For days, British, French and U.S. forces have been conducting air strikes in Libya. Despite coalition claims that their actions have made steady progress, voices of dissatisfaction and opposition are increasingly louder due to casualties caused by a strike ostensibly carried out in the name of humanitarianism.

    According to the U.S. Army, the operation “Odyssey Dawn,” which started on the afternoon of March 19, has largely weakened the capability of Libyan air defense. The first phase of the coalition’s mission to control Libyan air territory has achieved success, said Michael Glenn Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff of the United States, on March 20.

    The Western coalition emphasized that the first wave of the strike is “limited in scope,” but in fact it turned out otherwise, triggering great questions and doubts. Libya’s state-run TV station reported that 64 people died and 150 people were injured in the first day of the air strike. Such numbers are definitely going to increase with the ongoing strike.

    The two main purposes of the current air strike are to destroy Libyan air defense facilities and lay the groundwork for setting up a no-fly zone, which will allow Western fighters to cruise on one hand. On the other hand, it aims to stop Gaddafi’s eastern aggression and force military troops loyal to Gaddafi to evacuate from Benghazi and other places occupied by Libyan rebels. However, neither of the purposes has been achieved as of now, and Gaddafi is not compromising, either.

    The action implemented by the coalition was authorized by the U.N. Security Council in the name of “humanitarianism” to stop the killing of civilians by Gaddafi. However, the real situation is that casualties might be much higher than before Western interference. Aside from the deaths and injuries caused by the air strike, it will eventually turn into a humanitarian disaster because the interference might turn the civil conflict into a severe protracted civil war.

    Poor Libya is not the first “trial target” that the Western has attacked in the name of “humanitarianism.” Bosnia and Herzegovina, Iraq and so on are all the former “targets.” Sadly, the “experiment” never really succeeded. As seen from the other two countries, this so-called “humanitarianism” is actually just the first step toward overthrowing of another country’s political power.

    The historical experience also tells us that such military interference is only for self-serving political and economic interests or even just out of dislike for some leaders, such as Saddam and Gaddafi, though it is veiled by a humanitarian guise.

    However, it is definitely not under the pure name of “humanitarianism.” Then, who is going to clear the name of this cause?

    Therefore, we could see the turning of Arab League’s sides from supporting to waving and “regretting” within just a few days. In order to stop the bombing of civilians by Gaddafi, the Arab League appealed to the U.N. Security Council to set up a no-fly zone over Libya and provided a “legal” excuse for France and Britain to advance the 1973 no-fly ban.

    But, Arab League never expected the air strike on Libya could cause such a big disaster, and they may have to share the burden of deaths first. So, the Arab League started to condemn the military attacks on Libya on March 20.

    Arab League Secretary General Amr Moussa said what is currently happening in Libya has strayed away from the purpose of setting up no-fly zone approved by the U.N. Security Council. The council’s decision was done in order to protect civilians but not at the expense of sacrificing more civilians. The no-fly zone is expected but not bombs.

    Apart from the Arab League, Russia strongly appealed all sides to cease fire to avoid hurting more civilians and opposes to use of military forces indiscriminately. Iran condemns the air strike on Libya and questions Western countries’ improper purposes. Chávez, the President of Venezuela, said the air strike could only cause more bleeding. Also, Turkey, as one member of NATO, opposes the behavior of its “partners” and warns NATO that the military interference would result in very dangerous consequences.

  40. 40.

    Sharl

    Another Warren fan here, also too.

    OT – in case it hasn’t been noted in these parts, former Balloon Juice co-ombudsman* Radley Balko is leaving flagship ayntard outlet Reason to be crime reporter (?) for HuffAOLPo (woof!).

    BTW, FTR, FWIW, FYI – I actually appreciate Balko’s work. Glad to see him leave Reason, for, um, that reason.

    *first line of this post, inspired by post(s) cited here

  41. 41.

    Suffern ACE

    @Canadian Observer: Ah. Makes me so proud to be an American. So, have the French showed up yet to take that leadership role and undo the potential damage to foreign relations between the powers?

  42. 42.

    Sly

    I’ve been on Team Warren for quite some time, and the fact that she’s driving the Repubs (even more) bonkers using their favorite rhetorical weapons is just one more vindication, yes?

    The problem for liberals is that for the past forty years we’ve been communicating in an environment made receptive to conservative language through a carefully and systematically constructed political mythology. Rugged individuals! Incompetent government!

    Control the language and you control politics.

  44. 44.

    Suffern ACE

    @stuckinred: It happens. I mean, there are only so many ways to say, “I like Elizabeth Warren.” To generate comments, I’d like to say “I don’t like Elizabeth Warren” and make up some reason about an instance where she has pissed me off.

  47. 47.

    slag

    @Maude:

    The Repubs don’t like Warren because the people around the country understand what she is talking about.

    I think there’s a lot of truth to that. Well, there are many reasons why Republicans don’t like her, but a big one is that she’s a strength for their enemies–the entire working class population.

    And since I’ve already mentioned RadioLab here today, I might as well do it again. Here’s Robert Krulwich’s speech, at CalTech’s commencement event, urging the graduates to communicate scientific concepts to the uninitiated using narrative: http://www.radiolab.org/blogs/radiolab-blog/2008/jul/29/tell-me-a-story/. The basis for his argument is the fact that (whether they like it or not) scientists need to compete with creationists for public opinion. Truth, to some extent, is a vague, illusory concept that doesn’t really matter to people. Stories, on the other hand, seem to matter to people.

  50. 50.

    Suffern ACE

    @stuckinred: I felt badly for posting a reply to an off-topic post, especially when there were so many other threads available to post on Libya. Unfortunately, this whole operation has awakened simmering anti-French attitudes that I can’t seem to control. More appropriately to the thread, another thing I don’t like about the French government is that Elizabeth Warren has not been made President of that country yet.

  52. 52.

    Calouste

    @Suffern ACE:

    Ungrateful Americans. You help them gain their independence. You give them a statue that becomes the symbol for their nation. And what do you get for it? They accuse you of eating cheese.

    /French

  55. 55.

    Superluminar

    @Canadian shithead
    So, the Russians, Chinese and Chavez are unhappy at taking action against an autocratic regime? Wow, clearly they are right and acting completely out of principle. I suppose Canada’s sending of fast jets to help out is just made-up speculation then…

  56. 56.

    Omnes Omnibus

    @Superluminar: I wonder what would have happened if any of those countries has a seat on the UN Security Council and could have vetoed it. I guess we will never know.

  59. 59.

    kdaug

    Ain’t a RvD issue. That’s a distraction.

    It’s a class war, and Warren’s on the side of the good guys. She’s an old-school, hard-headed, (those with <$100m, $40m not adequate. Trust me.)

    Put the inheritance tax at 95%, and make Paris Hilton/Kardashian clone/whoever-the-latest-bubble-gum-pop-shithead/(OK, kdaug, calm down) pay their own goddamned way, and then we can talk about fucking Social Security and Medicaid.

  60. 60.

    Elizabelle

    Paul Krugman blogpost today on how nominations of Elizabeth Warren, Donald Berwick to head Medicare/Medicaid and Peter Diamond to the Fed, are all stymied by opposition and “controversy”.

    http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/03/22/ignoramitocracy/

    Part of what’s going on here is simply opposition for the sake of opposition. But as [Harold] Pollack says, the underlying problem is that anyone with actual expertise and any kind of public profile — in short, anyone who is actually qualified to hold a position — is bound to have said something, somewhere that can be taken out of context to make him or her sound like Pol Pot. Berwick has spoken in favor of evaluating medical effectiveness and has had kind words for the British National Health Service, so he wants to kill grandma and Sovietize America.

    So what lies down this road? A world in which key positions can only be filled by complete hacks … in short, we’re on our way to running America the way the Coalition Provisional Authority ran Iraq.

  61. 61.

    brucds

    Thanks for this discussion AL – in the spirit, I’m going to distill it into a two-short-paragraph post at my econ/politics blog right now – Reclaim the Narrative! (that’s not the name of the blog, just my verbal fist-bump to y’all)

  62. 62.

    Yutsano

    @Comrade Mary:

    Of course, it now looks as if the Harper Government™ will lose a vote of confidence very soon

    STOP! TEASING! ME! DAMMIT!!

    (I will seriously Snoopy dance if that fucktard loses PM.)

  63. 63.

    bob h

    The super-competent and super-knowledgeable must be avoided because they might demonstrate that government is the solution, not the problem.

  65. 65.

    mclaren

    Wunderbar! The Wall Street Urinal calling her “President Warren” and a “czar” proves reminiscent of the Hearst papers smearing Eugene Debs as “Dictator Debs” the “King of America” back during the Pullman Strike.

    She’s definitely doing the right things…which means that our spineless Whimperer In Chief Obama will fire her soon.

  66. 66.

    Corner Stone

    @mclaren: I’ve been wondering for a while when she’s going to get tired of the Village Treadmill.
    It won’t be Obama “firing” her, as we all know.

  67. 67.

    piratedan

    ty for all of the links regarding what she’s done and how she’s handling the spite of those who are most definitely aligned against her.

  68. 68.

    Wolfdaughter

    Mark S:

    Thanks for posting the link to the site which links to the TP site in Ohio. It is heartening to see that quite a few people who were supporting the TP and their candidates are all of a sudden saying, “Wait, I didn’t sign up to have my salary and bennies cut to the max! I didn’t sign up for union busting!” Maybe if these people are going, whoa, they might start to question some of their other assumptions. A girl can hope anyway.

    I second, third, ad infinitum, all of you praising Elizabeth Warren.

Comments are closed.