Once again Senator Warren's stories check out, her critics' do not

I’m sure white men never did that… /s


Unqualified white men getting hired? Padding their resumes? Unpossible! /s




God forbid a woman does that, though. That’s the real tragedy… Vaginas ruin EVERYTHING… /s


I was the reason my mother lost her first teaching job, around March, 1965. I was born in October.

edit: her resume says “resigned due to family”.


Reminds me of when right-wing media tried to blow up something Neil deGrasse Tyson said about George W. Bush and use it to prove that Tyson was a Communist and global warming was a hoax


It really wasn’t very smart. 75% of that faculty were white men - she really should have said she was a white guy if she wanted special treatment.


OK, I said “I’m not getting it”

I’m often disappointed when I read articles headlined “debunked”.

Often, (but not in this case) the bunk is a straw-man version of the opposing argument. In this case we aren’t explicitly told what the bunk is – neither the Salon excerpt nor the line “Right-wing critics are using this true story to create doubt and distrust about everything she says.” do so effectively, hence my post and also tgarretteaton’s outlining what we think the controversy to be about: Warren gave a reason for leaving school teaching in 2007 that does not include the discrimination aspect present in the 2014/2019 telling.

In my understanding “debunked” means “proven incorrect”. Generally that requires some proof that what has been reported is incorrect.

There is subsequently lots more information available – for example, two of her colleagues from that time at Riverdale have said essentially “Oh yeah, if you were showing you were out” and NJ legislative history from about a year later shows that what had been a common practice in the state of dismissing teachers for pregnancy was no longer allowed. So anyone should now be nearly 100% certain that what Warren is saying now is true.

But we are discussing a specific JASON WEISBERGER BoingBoing article from 9:13 AM WED OCT 9, 2019, where as far as I can see the only evidence presented that there is something objectively false in the critics’ reporting is that Warren says she stands behind what she has said.

Politifact has a great “Harmony of the Warren Stories” but they do so by taking a great liberty with the the chronology of what you say to be presented “in event order”.

One of the things I hate most about online discussion of political controversy is that when I tell someone on my side about a flaw, error, or logical fallacy in their argument, frequently their assumption is that I am an opponent and thus they need to double-down and “prove” me wrong.


Not mentioning one of the reasons is not proof that it didn’t happen.

The conspiracy theorists are the one with the conspiracy theory that needs proving, not Warren. If they say, “She didn’t mention it in a past interview” is proof it didn’t happen, then that is incorrect.

You want to criticize a single article for not being complete enough? I was talking about the evidence framed misleadingly in the original conspiracy theory, not the subsequent BoingBoing article.

When claiming they weren’t proven wrong, your burden-of-proof was reversed. The evidence they offered didn’t support their assertion in the first place. They used an article where she explained why she didn’t broadly pursue a field of study (studying education) and conflated that as a specific explanation why she didn’t continue in a specific job.

I don’t see where they took any liberty with anything, they repeated the quotes. I also don’t see where she said “I’ve never encountered pregnancy discrimination” or even, “I resigned that specific job without ever receiving any pressure from pregnancy discrimination.”

Most simply:
“Not mentioning it once” was never “She said it didn’t happen.”

I’m making no assumptions about you. If you’re saying a lack of evidence is the same as positive evidence here, I just disagree with that.


You’re making sure people don’t misattribute the smear campaign to the right?


“Warren lied about why she left a job.”

No, that’s not what the word ‘lied’ means.

“Warren told two different stories about why she left a job.”

Maybe they’re both true. The world is complicated.


Don’t worry, there will be plenty of time for that nonsense, looks like another 13 months.


Facts are kryptonite to fabulists. Always. Of course, fabulists need to believe that everyone is as full of crap as they are.

1 Like

This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.