Elizabeth Warren's Pregnant Pause

[Roy]

Both statements are decades removed from the event - error and recalling incorrectly defy credulity. Were either the case, the 2007 and 2019 statements should agree with each other and differ with the reality of what happened in 1971.

So Warren is allowed to misremember between 1971 and 2007, but not between 2007 and 2019

[Cow Poke]

Would it not be fair to say it was accurate up until the point you officially informed him you had stopped holding Warren to the offense?

Jim

Only in part, but he's a big boy, and can answer for himself. But thank you ever so kindly for your concern.

[Mountain Man]

So if two statements are irreconcilable, that's a lie, even if made more than a decade apart? No allowance made for error or misremembering or context or even subsequent corrections?

That's ridiculously harsh.

Getting forced out of a job you love because you're pregnant is not the sort of thing you "misremember" to the point that you tell a two irreconcilable versions of the story a decade apart. But it's a nice rationalization.

[Mountain Man]

Yep - it's kinda crazy. When telling about an event, we don't usually give every detail, depending on why we are telling the story. The people we are telling usually don't care about ancillary details that don't contribute to the purpose of telling it unless they just have time to kill. And some times we just don't remember some aspect of the story - especially later. And our own understanding of the event and what was significant about it changes over time. To go through someone's account of an event over decades and demand every telling be identical and complete is absurd.


Jim

1) I loved my job but was forced to resign because I was pregnant.
2) I willingly resigned because I realized my choice of career wasn't going to work out for me.

You're right, these represent the exact same story with only ancillary details included or excluded depending on the audience.

And if you believe that then you'll be eager to buy this little bridge in Brooklyn that I have for sale. Special price just for you because I know you're too smart to be conned!

[Roy]

1) I loved my job but was forced to resign because I was pregnant.
2) I willingly resigned because I realized my choice of career wasn't going to work out for me.

You're right, these represent the exact same story with only ancillary details included or excluded depending on the audience.

But they don't represent what Warren said, only your understanding of it.

And if you believe that then you'll be eager to buy this little bridge in Brooklyn that I have for sale. Special price just for you because I know you're too smart to be conned!

True - Jim wouldn't fall for a hoax article which claimed a satellite picture of Egyptian pyramids was a actually a view of a lost city in Antarctica discovered using ice-penetrating rays.

[Teallaura]

The statements do not conflict, as detailed extensively in this thread.

--Sam

Yes they do, as shown in actual quotations. Evidence outweighs your inference.

[Sam]

Yes they do, as shown in actual quotations. Evidence outweighs your inference.

As detailed in the timeline constructed above, the quotes do not contradict each other.

Evidence of lying would be that Warren didn't take graduate courses in education sometime between June 1971 and 1972. That's the only thing, right now, that you could use to show Warren was lying. Her stories, right now, are consistent.

Can't expect people to follow complicated matters of history or law or whatnot. Definitely can expect people to not poke out their own eyes so they can parrot mendacious smears against others.

--Sam

[Teallaura]

So Warren is allowed to misremember between 1971 and 2007, but not between 2007 and 2019

It's not consistent - that's the problem. If she's gonna make a mistake, it's far more likely in the 36 years between 1971 and 2007 than in the 12 years between 2007 and 2019. In 18 years of conducting interviews, I can't think of such a case were the later accounts were in conflict but the patient insisted credibly that both were true. Usually, the second account was prefaced with "I was wrong about..." or, "I lied about...".

The likelihood is she simply lied - either defensively in 2007 or deceptively in 2019.

That the change in her story reflects the current political theme of discrimination is also a red flag - and makes the 2019 account more suspect.

[Teallaura]

As detailed in the timeline constructed above, the quotes do not contradict each other.

...

--Sam

*emphasis mine


See? You don't read what I write - but you expect me to read all your stuff.

[Sam]

It's not consistent - that's the problem. If she's gonna make a mistake, it's far more likely in the 36 years between 1971 and 2007 than in the 12 years between 2007 and 2019. In 18 years of conducting interviews, I can't think of such a case were the later accounts were in conflict but the patient insisted credibly that both were true. Usually, the second account was prefaced with "I was wrong about..." or, "I lied about...".

The likelihood is she simply lied - either defensively in 2007 or deceptively in 2019.

That the change in her story reflects the current political theme of discrimination is also a red flag - and makes the 2019 account more suspect.

The story didn't change:

In 2007, she recounted that she took graduate courses shortly before her child's birth and stayed at home for a couple years afterward.

In 2019, she recounts that she was forcibly resigned from her job earlier in the year, consistent with NJ law at the time.

You're talking about an omission in 2007 that wasn't germane or crucial to the discussion she was having.

Y'all are just reaching very far out on a limb to accuse Warren of lying and I'd go as far as to say that's a sin.

--Sam

[Roy]

It's not consistent - that's the problem. If she's gonna make a mistake, it's far more likely in the 36 years between 1971 and 2007 than in the 12 years between 2007 and 2019.

Yes, it is far more likely. But that's not the same definitely happening then.

[JimL]

Just as she's matching Biden's poll numbers, she comes up with more reasons to challenge her truthfulness....


Report disputes Elizabeth Warren’s claim she was let go from teaching job over pregnancy

And, yeah, I know, Trump lies.

Since you are not really concerned with truthfulness when it comes to a president, not sure why you'd even bring up this silliness.

[Mountain Man]

But they don't represent what Warren said...

What Warren said in 2007: "...my first year post-graduation I worked in a public school system with the children with disabilities. I did that for a year, and then that summer I didn’t have the education courses, so I was on an ’emergency certificate,’ it was called. I went back to graduate school and took a couple of courses in education and said, ‘I don’t think this is going to work out for me.’"

My summary: "I willingly resigned because I realized my choice of career wasn't going to work out for me."

What Warren said in 2019: "I became a special needs teacher. I have lived my dream job! ... I would probably still be doing the work today but by the end of the first year, I was visibly pregnant, and the principal did what principles did in those days: wish me luck and hire someone else for the job."

My summary: "I loved my job but was forced to resign because I was pregnant."

So my summaries in fact track pretty closely with what Warren said, and the point remains: these are contradictory accounts and not merely variations of the same story with only "ancillary details" changed.

[Roy]

What Warren said in 2007: "...my first year post-graduation I worked in a public school system with the children with disabilities. I did that for a year, and then that summer I didn’t have the education courses, so I was on an ’emergency certificate,’ it was called. I went back to graduate school and took a couple of courses in education and said, ‘I don’t think this is going to work out for me.’"

My summary: "I willingly resigned because I realized my choice of career wasn't going to work out for me."

So Warren didn't say she resigned willingly, that was an addition by you. She might have been made to resign before she had decided whether or not to continue in that career. She may have wished to continue working (either further into her pregnancy or returning after the birth) while she decided what to do next, but was unable to do so because she was made to resign. In fact the text beyond your snippet indicates that she hadn't decided what she might want to do instead: [I]"I was pregnant with my first baby, so I had a baby and stayed home for a couple of years, and I was really casting about, thinking, 'What am I going to do?'"

So my summaries in fact track pretty closely with what Warren said, ...

Except you haven't quoted anything by Warren that says she resigned willingly. That's a far more obvious discrepancy than the ones for which you are calling Warren a liar.

[Cow Poke]

Since you are not really concerned with truthfulness when it comes to a president,

Still spewing forth lies, eh?