Liz Can Do More Than Castrate Drumpfs

There is no doubt that Elizabeth Warren has turned Drumpf into The Orange Eunuch.

Like a crazed squirrel, he can look into every nook and cranny of Drumpf Tower, search all over Manhattan, even take a peek into Chris Christie’s lunch box. But Drumpf still won’t find his nuts. The senator from Massachusetts has not-so-surgically removed them right in front of the world and is about to take them across this country as a—excuse me—”testament” to what a strong woman can do to a “thin-skinned, racist bully” and a “loud, nasty, thin-skinned fraud.”

But as her appearance on Rachel Maddow’s show last night proved, she is more than a eunuch-maker. She is a powerful voice for Hillary Clinton and the Democratic Party’s values.

After telling St. Rachel that Democrats, winding down a hard-fought primary, “need to start thinking about all of this together” and focusing on the differences between Democrats and Republicans, she said this:

WARREN: But, you know, I want to add another part to this because I think it really matters here. And I like our talking back and forth but I want to get this on the table and get it on the table early. Hillary Clinton won. And she won because she’s a fighter, she’s out there, she’s tough. And I think this is what we need.

Look at who she is. For 25 years, she’s been taking the incomings, right? The right wing has thrown everything they possibly can at her. And what does she do? A lot of people would just hang up their spurs. They’d say, “You know, I’ve had enough of this.” And she doesn’t. What she’s done is she gets back up and she gets back in the warren endorsing clinton.jpgfight.

As a Democrat, one of the things that frustrates me the most is there are a lot of times we just don’t get in the fight. We ask “pretty please” if we can have things, or we make the argument for why it is the best thing to do, and then wait patiently for the other side to agree to come along. We negotiate. We start our opening position by negotiating. You know, and I get that. I get the reason that you should be willing to negotiate sometimes. But you also ought to be willing to throw a punch.

And there are a lot of things that people say about Hillary Clinton. But nobody says that she doesn’t know how to throw a punch.

MADDOW: As somebody — I agree with you, both on the perseverance and on the fighter characterization of Hillary Clinton. I think that’s the most important way to understand her political power, her willingness to never give up. We have gone 240 years in this country without a woman ever being nominated for president, let alone elected one.


MADDOW: Her aggression and her stance as a fighter in politics, does that make her more palatable to a country who apparently has a real problem with this concept, or less? Does that make it harder for her?

WARREN: You know, to me, this isn’t about “palatable” anymore. This is about what we need to survive. This is about whether or not we are going to have a country that just works for the Donald Trumps of the world, that just works for a handful of the largest corporations of the world, or a country that really is building an economic future for all of us.

And yes, I think having a fighter in the lead, a female fighter in the lead, is exactly what this country needs.

Later she talked about something that all Democrats believe—not just Bernie supporters—and because of her credentials, she could talk about it with all credibility:

WARREN: There are so many more people on our side. And I’m not just talking Democrats here. You talk about those core issues, about Social Security, about college, about raising the minimum wage, about reining in Wall Street. You look at those core issues and somewhere between 60 percent and 75 percent of all of America, that’s Democrats, Republicans, independents, libertarians, vegetarians. They sign up and say,“Yes, I’m for that.”

So, the question is then, Rachel — why hasn’t that happened? Why hasn’t it happened?

The answer is because Washington, this place where we are right now. It is the bubble. It’s the bubble that’s created by the money. It is the bubble that is created by the contributions, by the lobbyists, by every part of this tight little circle. Our only chance to break out of that is that we got to say, against your concentrated money and power, “We’re going to put up our voices and our votes and we’re going to be here. We’re going to be here in these elections. And we’re going to make sure that the people who run for office and get elected are the ones who are going to work for the American people.”

That’s what this is all about.

Amen. And amen.



  1. It’s Warren saying these things, not Clinton.


  2. King Beauregard

     /  June 10, 2016

    “As a Democrat, one of the things that frustrates me the most is there are a lot of times we just don’t get in the fight. We ask “pretty please” if we can have things, or we make the argument for why it is the best thing to do, and then wait patiently for the other side to agree to come along. We negotiate. We start our opening position by negotiating.”

    Hey Liz Warren, give me $500.

    … oh what’s that I hear, you have no incentive whatsoever to give me $500? Sounds like I need to give you some reason to make it worth your while to hand me $500, imagine that.

    That is precisely the position the Democrats find themselves in with Republicans: the Republicans have the power to obstruct and they have no incentive not to, unless Democrats give them one. That has been the central problem of our Congress ever since 2010, and the problem is only made worse by people like Liz saying Democrats need to “fight harder”. The fighting that needs to be done is on Election Day, by voters, to make sure there are enough Democrats in power that they can have the power to overpower the Republicans.

    Our government runs on numbers, not on “will” or “spine” or whatever. And when roughly half of Congress is no longer interested in serving the public, at that point the job falls to the electorate to get rid of them. The Left already has this bad habit of withholding their votes until the Democrats implements progressive policies; if it worked that way the Democrats wouldn’t even need their votes. But that’s NOT how it works so don’t encourage them.

    I’m disappointed in you, Liz.


    • You must be having an off day, KB. I don’t get it. There’s no doubt in my mind that Liz is the right kind of Congress person and would like very much to clean house. Doing that is going to involve a lot more than lining up busses on election day.


      • King Beauregard

         /  June 10, 2016

        My problem with Liz is her own words, as quoted above.

        So what is Liz’s actual plan for overcoming Republican obstruction? And if she has a functioning plan, why has she kept it to herself all these years she’s been in the Senate?

        I will have the same response to anyone — especially an incumbent — who claims that the Democrats have means to overcome obstruction that they simply haven’t tried yet. At least Bernie had a plan; it was a terrible plan (summoning hordes of protesters to coerce Republicans to do what he wanted) and completely antithetical to the notion of democracy and the rule of law, but at least it was a plan. I can’t even give Liz credit for a terrible plan, just the insistence that Democrats have options other than negotiating.


%d bloggers like this: