More Hypocrisy: Elizabeth Warren Says She’s Not a One-Percenter

Daniel Doherty | January 28, 2012 8:30 AM

What planet does Massachusetts Senate Democratic candidate Elizabeth Warren live on when owning a $5 million home doesn’t constitute being wealthy?

The rhetoric of class and inequality is back in force, and Massachusetts Senate candidate Elizabeth Warren -- the standard-bearer for a combative new progressivism -- made the case to MSNBC's Lawrence O’Donnell last night that members of the Senate shouldn't own stock.
“I realize there are some wealthy individuals – I’m not one of them, but some wealthy individuals who have a lot of stock portfolios" she told him.

Hard to see how Warren wouldn't be, by most standards, wealthy, according to the Personal Financial Disclosure form she filed to run for Senate shows that she's worth as much as $14.5 million. She earned more than $429,000 from Harvard last year alone for a total of about $700,000, and lives in a house worth $5 million.

For some inexplicable reason, Elizabeth Warren seems to think it’s politically expedient to lie to voters on national television. Granted, in order for the former Harvard professor to oust incumbent Senator Scott Brown in November, she must craft a compelling narrative that will resonate with her constituents. Over the last several months, for example, she has positioned herself as a crusader for the middle class by castigating Wall Street bankers, financiers, and wealthy business executives. Until now, perhaps, she has garnered unprecedented support and even convinced thousands of Bay State voters to donate money to her campaign.

What’s astounding, though, is that prior to her interview with Lawrence O’Donnell, her personal finances had already been released to the American public. In other words, what could she possibly have hoped to gain by asserting she was not really a wealthy individual? Indeed, her six figure salary from Harvard University alone last year puts her in the top income bracket, and that doesn’t even include the millions of dollars she’s accumulated over the course of her career. Thus, the so-called intellectual founder of the Occupy Wall Street movement is, in fact, a one-percenter.