Brown uses Warren's heritage issue in T.V. spot
September 24th, 2012
01:45 PM ET
10 years ago

Brown uses Warren's heritage issue in T.V. spot

(CNN) – Questions over Elizabeth Warren's claims of Native American heritage were revived by her rival for U.S. Senate Monday in a television ad characterizing Warren as untrustworthy.

Sen. Scott Brown, locked in a tight battle with Warren in Massachusetts, also used the topic to attack Warren at a debate last week. He asserts Warren used Native American heritage to help her chances of being hired by Harvard Law School as a professor.

- Follow the Ticker on Twitter: @PoliticalTicker

- Check out the CNN Electoral Map and Calculator and game out your own strategy for November.

In the 30-second spot, news clips focusing on Warren's claims are used to cast doubt on the former Obama administration official's trustworthiness. In the final clip, a reporter asks Warren if there is anything that will "come out about you that we don't already know."

"I don't think so, but who knows," Warren responds.

Last week, Brown opened an hour-long debate with the issue, claiming Warren wasn't being totally transparent about why she was listed as Native American in official documents at Harvard Law School.

"Professor Warren claimed that she was a Native American, a person of color and as you can see, she's not," Brown said. He repeated his call for his opponent to release records showing whether she had claimed Native American heritage on job applications.

"When you are a U.S. Senator, you have to pass a test and that's one of character and honesty and truthfulness. I believe and others believe she's failed that test," Brown said.

Warren defended her claim, saying that she had learned of her heritage from her family, adding that "my mother was part Delaware and part Cherokee."

Warren has denied that she ever used her heritage to gain access to college or employment.

Previously, Warren has said that she listed herself as having Native American roots while at Harvard University Law School to meet other people with similar backgrounds.

CNN's Kevin Liptak and Dana Davidsen contributed to this report.

Filed under: Elizabeth Warren • Massachusetts • Scott Brown • Senate
soundoff (57 Responses)
  1. Claudia, Houston, Tx

    We can't go around the World seeking Freedom and Democracy when Republicans are attempting to disinfranchise Americans of their voting rights. We can't stand with Israel when we can't stand with our own people, that's not honesty nor is it trustworthy. Republicans should be disinfranchised of every being a party in this United States.

    September 24, 2012 03:15 pm at 3:15 pm |
  2. The REAL Truth...

    @rosco – Im very impressed with Mr. Brown for speaking facts
    Right wingers are so easily impressed. They even like their flip-flopping no-backbone jellyfish potus nominee !

    September 24, 2012 03:18 pm at 3:18 pm |
  3. Thomas

    If Brown would just post more images of him in his male modeling days , he might get more swing voters .

    September 24, 2012 03:20 pm at 3:20 pm |
  4. PTNY

    Brown just like the entire GOP disrespects women anyway. He'll never give up until she is battered by him.
    She'll still win.

    September 24, 2012 03:21 pm at 3:21 pm |
  5. Jokers

    Scott Centerfold Brown seems to think this is a winner for him but I doubt that it is, A sitting US nenator and that is what he brings to the table?!He is such a joke!

    September 24, 2012 03:22 pm at 3:22 pm |
  6. v_mag

    In its simplest terms, this entire election is about moving forward or going back. "Back" means back to the policies of George W. Bush which crashed the economy. "Back" means back to the 2008 when McConnell said his number 1 priority was to see that Obama was a 1-term president. "Forward" means a new set of people in Washington who are not content to sit on their hands while the country implodes, but are committed to doing their jobs.

    And another thing. I'm just speculating here. Is George W incapacitated? Has he had a stroke or gone off his rocker? No one will mention his name on either side of the political divide and he hasn't been seen in a long time, which sounds to me like all the politicians know he's near death and they don't care to say anything against a person who's nearing the end. This could be another "Paul is dead" hoax, but has anyone got an explanation for why the Obama folks are not pounding on Bush's record? After all, if we get Romney, we're really just getting Bush III.

    September 24, 2012 03:35 pm at 3:35 pm |
  7. Heimlick

    "And to think, I have his daughter's CDs."

    Yeah – bring something/someone TOTALLY irellevent into the mix. And YOU point a finger?

    September 24, 2012 03:43 pm at 3:43 pm |
1 2 3