The Massachusetts Republican Party recants the story of the emperor with no clothes. Further Scott Brown, saying he is a Republican, has repeatedly stated he is not a "rock thrower" but is a "problem solver." His backers who he votes with 75% of the time, the other 25% being meaningless exercises in accomplishing nothing, have descended into not only silliness but dangerous smearing ad hominem attacks by taking facts out of context or using outright deception. So does the good Senator stand with these people or not? At the moment it seems he would rather huddle in back rooms and carry on guerilla warfare than stepping forward and denouncing such nonsense. Maybe instead he would finally give the voters of this state some inkling of what would get his vote. His record so far is mostly a rubber stamp of his Party's power brokers. Even this further nonsense about being the "second most bipartisan senator" only means among those who are squarely partisan they need some beauty votes to keep their seat. It is far from true bipartisanship. Also to set the record straight the Dean that hired Professor Warren stated she was not brought to Harvard as a tenured professor on any such ethnic basis of being a Native American. She was already a tenured professor at the University of Pennsylvania at the time and had been asked even a year or so earlier if she would come to Harvard. She delayed this because of family issues but then accepted. She move from one tenured positon to another after a long career of teaching, research, and publishing. So let's move on and leave this 20 year old non issue aside and see what both these candidates have in mind to make the future more prosperous for as many as possible. Deal?

Mr. Maginn was pretty much just doing his job in putting out this press release. The Globe, by treating it as a serious news story, isn't doing theirs.

OETKB: Sorry, can't take that deal to sweep this under the rug. I am not Scott Brown or his campaign -- I am a registered Democrat. And I want to know exactly how this woman, and Harvard University, came to claim her as a Native American faculty member when there is zero -- not 1/32, but zero - evidence to back it up other than a regrettable statement from Prof. Warren herself that her aunt had high cheekbones "like all the Indians." And I'm not interested in some random dean assuring us years after the fact that her ten-year plus records of falsely claiming minority status had nothing at all to do with her career. Please take a moment to honestly consider what you would be saying if Scott Brown had been caught doing this. If you say that your position would be the same, I will have a hard time believing that, sorry. That mean to me that we are letting Warren's politics excuse her grave personal shortcoming, and I am getting sick of always doing that. What happened to our tradition of liberal politicians like Michael Dukakis, Paul Tsongas, and Tip O'Neill, who were personally incorruptible as well as right on policy? Elizabeth Warren should take a bus to So. Huntington Avenue and visit the North American Indian Center of Boston, a place I assure you she has never graced with the aura of her Harvard professorship, to see what issues really confront our local Native American neighbors, whose problems and challenges remain hidden even as people like Elizabeth Warren and institutions like Harvard shamelessly exploit non-existent connections. Disgraceful. I bet the NAICOB would even invite her to a "luncheon."

We are now entering the area of overkill with this latest from Brown's buddies. They are approaching bullying with their attempts to keep this non-story in the limelight. Harvard and Elizabeth Warren have answered their questions. Enough. Get to the issues.

Anyone remember Adam Wheeler? He falsified information to get into Harvard as an undergrad. See http://www.thefastertimes.com/academicpolitics/2010/05/20/imagined-pasts-the-adam-wheeler-case-and-academic-snobbery/ He was arrested and thrown in jail. He was convicted of defrauding Harvard out of the student aid it provided him. However, during the years he was at Harvard, he got mostly As and Bs, and he did achieve some of the recognition and awards he claimed, just not all of them. So was Adam Wheeler "qualified" to be a Harvard student? And if that is the only relevant question, then why did we send him to jail and propose to send Prof. Warren to Washington as our senator? Cheating is cheating.

The Republican chairman may be correct in challenging both Lizzy Warren and Harvard Law School as truthful in the matter of questions about the professor's ethnic heritage. But Robert Maginn is wrong and three dollars short of well timed in presumably posting a three page challenge letter to Drew Gilpin Faust, the Harvard prexy. The evidence pro Lizzy's claim to some sort of American Indian heritage seems to consist of her own memories of family lore and somebody's liking high cheek bones that allegedly significy American Indian genes... and a genaeologist's claim to have found a written report by a Warren female ancestor that a still earlier ancestor was a member of a specific Indian tribe. Was there a written record that the earlier ancestor made a recorded statement of being a tribal member? Maginn's letter story appears a week after all the broughaha started, indicating that either he had no time to get involved in trivia... that he did not see it as very important... or that he just did not notice. Whatever the case, his writing to the Harvard president may be appropriate as he is a Harvard alum, but certainly he wrote as a party hack rather than a proud graduate of the class of ????. There seems to be no indiation that Maginn is a proud Harvard Law School product. His letter - whether stinging or not - brings what might have been a valid reason to challenge Lizzy's U.S. Senate candidacy to the level of a dirty trick.

One other thing about this article: a genealogist "has outlined a connection" showing Warren's Native American roots. Note the clever phrasing. What is "outlined a connection"? Does that mean "proved"? No. By using this misleading language, the Globe perpetiates the idea that there is even this fig leaf of truth behind Warren's deception, which there is not. There is no proven connectino at all, none. The fact that the Globe is continuing to provide, and take, cover in the now-discredited story of the great-great-great grandmother is another troubling aspect of this sorry debacle.

Jeanne, Too funny. This news organization covered this story probably 6,342,678 times... if they didn't, they'd be accused of liberal bias. And I was sure (and today have been proved right) that the stable of conservative commenters directed to keep hammering Warren would not be done shooting for mentions 6,342,679 and 6,342,680, to avoid the spotlight swinging back to the GOP's ongoing war on America. Accordingly, given the far fewer references in this paper to Brown's lies, deception, and record in support of the GOP's ongoing war on America, I'd say there is still room to question Brown too. Unless, of course, you think a candidate's job application from over 20 years ago is more important than their current positions and accomplishments?

She checked a box as a minority in a Legal profession directory that was used in hiring decisions. Why doesn't Elizabeth Warren embrace affirmative action, including her own hire? Why is she so insistent that hers was a MERIT based hire, if there isn't any issue with affirmative action. She should just declare herself an "Affirmative Action Baby", as SJC Sotomayor did.

I recognize that you are totally comfortable with who you are, but the whole L-O-L! thing is embarrassing, even for someone who disagrees with virtually everything you post. You and Mike Arnold are fervent, if nothing else, but also caricatures. If you have a point of view to express, by all means, express away, but your cackling is tedious. Sincerely, not your friend, mw

Ms Warren, I wasn't happy with how you handled this thing from day one, but the fervor with which the Brown/Fehrnstrom machine has dogged it, including the hired posters on this piece, tell me that they are very worried, and who they are. This issue will follow you to election day, make no mistake about it. Figure out how you intend to deal with it and do it! Senator Brown and Eric are not nice people, they will beat this story until it can be beat no more. I do believe that you have the means to help the middle class, please do not let these people beat you and us on an issue that is ultimately unimportant, but will be made to be something defining.

I find Mr. Maginn's efforts to be a total red herring. He is creating a distraction over an issue that is irrelevant to substantive issues impacting Massachusetts voters. Is this really the best Maginn can do to refute Warren's positition? How about arguing on the merits of her ideas and initiatives? At least that would truly inform voters about Brown's ways of improving Massachusetts. Perhaps Brown really does not have much to say about how to improve Massachusetts, or the ailments of the United States. Warren certainly has clear ideas about what needs changing within consumer and banking laws. What is Brown's position. I could pretty much go either way with Brown or Warren, but honestly, seeing the tactics of Maginn leaves me with nothing but cold anger and disdain for the Republican party. They are nothing more than the party of nasty. A party that feels the poor deserve to be poor, and will pull every dirty trick in the book to keep it that way; instead of coming up with solutions that help everyone to thrive.