"Warren, a Harvard Law School professor, did not argue the coal case in two lower courts, where LTV lost. Instead, she is listed on a petition to urge the Supreme Court to review the case, which the court rejected."

Another half-baked controversy because she wanted the case reviewed?

What I'm getting from this and the Travelers case is that she sided with large corporations to ensure that the corporations retained the financial ability to pay its victims/retirees promptly instead of relying on future settlements, and in order to do so, there had to be trade-offs so the corporations would get something out of it.

Not as evil as the Globe is trying to make it out to be.

I don't recall any of your Romney articles requiring the readers to pay to read them. So Lizzie is STILL making the people pay, even in news print.

Any chance the Globe will write a story about Warren's apparently illegal practice of law in Mass. without a license?  Even if this is turns out to be legal based on some exemption, I think this is a story worth looking into.  The staff is probably looking for the right spin, this takes time...

The Globe pretends to inform people about bankruptcy law in a few sentences, leaving enough fodder for both sides.  In truth there is not enough information to make a judgment.  If these cases are going to be brought out then a fuller discussion and enlightenment is required.  A reporter just writing down what each side said without some independent research is a disservice to the public.  After reading and rereading the article it is hard to figure out rationales.  As usual if you support one candidate or the other that is where your opinion migrates.  In short it leaves us just where we were before this was presented.  Does the Globe really want the next debate cluttered with a few complicated cases with many actors and readers with little expertise on the subject are suppose to figure out if this is good, bad, or indifferent?  All I know is she was respected for her work and it helped reform our bankruptcy laws.  It preserved payments to claimants, distributed funds reasonably, and tried to keep companies from shirking their responsibilities by declaring bankruptcy.  

Clearly, this woman is a liar and a hypocrite.  And the spin put out by her in this article is laughable. 

Since Ms. Warren never passed the Massachusetts Bar, how is it that she can practice law? 

Warren, through her campaign, declined an interview request. What is she hiding?

This is another sounds strangely similar to her denial that she claimed Indian heritage for career advancment.  dishonest, immoral - and self serving?

She's a fraud! This is what happens when the Democratic regime in MA hand picks its candidates instead of letting the voters decide. The party did not want a primary so they forced all the other candidates to withdraw while they annointed Miss Lizzie.

More evidence of how the Dems continue to strip away your freedoms.

A person who accepts money to perform obscene acts is called a 'prostitute'.

I refer to her debate performance when I ask, "why did she repeat the words, billionaire and millionaire" 37 times? She lacks that amazing grace and bludgeons her supporters with campaign slogans designed to inflame the masses of "poor folks" who hate "rich" people. Class warfare versus telling the truth is the stratagem. The truth is simple. She is a lawyer who like any good debater will take any side and argue it. In the case in point here, she must have done it for the bucks. So, why now, is she our declared champion and protector against those really nasty banks and businesses like Travelers and LTV Steel? May I suggest she found a step ladder. Not answering or providing records and evading the truth is her stock in trade. Yes, she is in the political trade where facts lie buried under the truth. Her Harvard pull got her the contacts for this nomination. If good Democrats really had a choice, would they want her for this senate seat? Try that question on your next Democrat survey.

Liz Warren Liberal . Liz Warren  Phony.

typical Republican smears in the Karl Rove era:  take the opponents best features, here intelligence and candor, through lies and more lies endlessly repeated with the Republican Noise Machine, convert into stupidity and liar ...

at long last, does Scott Brown and his ilk have no decency?  that answer is obvious.  this campaign is all about dressing up Scott Brown in sheep's clothing ... oh, Mr. Independent Senator ... you'll vote lockstep with your Republican colleagues reliably, right?  that is all you need to know, and it is a true thing.  all the rest is spin, noise and, quite frankly, misogynist smears.  Warren as an affirmative action baby and now a liar?  yeah, and I got a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you.  apparently Brown is counting on the ability to fool most of the people some of the time.

When Jim Braude asked in the interview yesterday if she would release a list of her other clients, she replied "I don't have it". Warren isn't big on transparency, and clearly there is a reason. Warren, relase your Penn and Harvard employee records and client list; as a consumer advocate don't you believe voters have a right to know?

Seems like big corporations wrote her some Big Paychecks which she had no problem cashing at the expense of workers, both LTV and Travelars Insurance.  Not to mention she can't state what a 'middle income' salary is.   She is so uninspiring and while I am a Democrat, Scott Brown is earning my vote not as much as Ms. Warren is losing it.

Wow, are you repubs are really getting desperate. You all sound like hungry wolves going for a very small piece of meat.

Is this all you can come up with. I just can't stop laughing.Can't you see how stupid this makes you look? If Elizabeth Warren had earned 10 million dollars this might be a story, but $10,000 over 20 years ago. Do you really think that lawyers only represent people that they love and admire? Thanks for the laugh.

Look this is simply RIDICULOUS. Get a check on reality. People had LIVES BEFORE running for office now and it included working sometimes with different corporations or on behalf of them. Sometimes especially in the legal field, as I personally have experienced in a NON-attorney, role one must represent many different interests. Guess what? We LIVE in a capitalist society in case you haven't noticed. In our system even corporations deserve representation as well. You may not love the company you represent but in our system EVERYONE deserves their day in court with legal counsel. THIS is a good thing AND the attorney in a firm does NOT often get to pick and choose whom they represent. Without corporation attorney advocacy the entire economic system would collapse as companies ad infinitum would be sued with NO representation. Even plaintiffs would suffer by that. 1993 is a long time ago and ONCE AGAIN I think Elizabeth has answered this sufficiently. I was ALWAYS a left of center cause advocate but that did not mean I did not have to make a living. Representing insurance companies, corporations and those involved in bankruptcy need representation too and sometimes as in life things are not neatly wrapped packages. GET A GRIP Senator Brown, my image is of you and your staff wading through all kinds of material just to get a GOTCHA MOMENT on this gem of a candidate. You were a BULLY in the first debate and you continue to be so. I look at Elizabeth Warren now who formed the Consumer Protection Bureau for what she IS and WILL be a STRONG ADVOCATE FOR THE MIDDLE CLASS. Massachusetts should consider itself LUCKY to get this brilliant woman. Mr. Brown, Jesus said, do not look at the speck the other man's eye when YOU have a LOG in your own and I say YOU HAVE A BIG ONE!

Liberal strategy is to bludgeon opposing voices into silence.  No matter how much truth is told, the response is not to present the truth.  It is to batter and ram the opposition with damning epithets.  Lacking a reasoned, rational response for Professor Warren's faux feathers,  school yard name calling splashes the playground with dirty words.  The latest,  "a Karl Rove script" left out that killer defamation, "Neocon" and "stupid right winger".   Saying the Democrats lack their own "Noise machine".  is like saying  a chicken haas no feathers.    No defense exists that would satisfy a "believer" who denies reality.   Let us look at a little bit of reality.  Do you really believe that the windmill and clean energy business will employ those thousands of displaced workers from the "dirty" oil and gas industry?   Did the "Hate groups" that blasted the oil pipe line from Canada help lower the cost of gasoline from its current nearly $4/gallon.  Do you really believe the fed printing paper money does not make you the payer of our national debt with your cheapened pay check?  How many independent Democrat senators were there when Obama, Harry and Nancy blasted that unread million page Obamacare law through Congress at Midnight?

I have criticized the Globe for appearing heavily biased in its articles associated with this campaign (favoring the Warren campaign)......I was pleased read this article and to see that there is some motivation on the part of the Globe's editorial staff to be fair in its reporting. Thank You.

This article reads as though it was a lightly reworked press release from the Scott Brown campaign. Is that how the Globe's responds to accusations of bias?

"would seem to undercut her image as a middle-class champion"......

Nope.  Does undercut......   same with the Travelers suit, same with her claiming minority status, same with her drawing 340K for teaching one class...

The wheels appear to be coming off the Warren campaign.  I can hear all the shrill cries of gender discrimination now.