People magazine dragged out its goo bucket again to praise ultraliberal Senator Elizabeth Warren in the latest (November 3) issue. The headline is “The YouTube Senator: As she fought the big banks, she never expected that Senate hearings would go as viral as cat videos – and make her a political star.”

Reporter Sandra Sobieraj Westfall began: “As she is not a dyspeptic pop star or a starlet dumping ice water on her head for charity, Massachusetts senator Elizabeth Warren is an unlikely Internet sensation.”

Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren has become a darling of the left for being an early promoter of the "you didn't build that" meme President Obama used during the 2012 presidential campaign, and for generally espousing positions to the left of Hillary Clinton.

The press rushed to Warren's defense in 2012 when compelling evidence that she had used her barely present Indian ancestry to "cheat on affirmative action" to advance her academic career went public. So it shouldn't surprise anyone that they have paid little attention to her recent outrageous attempt to establish her leftist bona fides as a harsh critic of Israel, seen in the video after the jump:

The Daily Kos has come a long way since the days when  they merely rejoiced in being easily bribed at their YearlyKos conventions (now renamed Netroots Nation) by presidential aspirants such as Mark Warner who plied the Kossacks with free sushi and expensive liquor at the Stratosphere in Las Vegas in 2006. Yes, they have moved up in the world to the point where they perceive themselves as king, or rather queen, makers. Not only have they basically endorsed the presidential candidacy of Elizabeth Warren, they have even provided her with a campaign song, Run Liz Run.

Oddly enough, even though this campaign song takes note of Elizabeth Warren as a woman, there is no mention of her well known Cherokee heritage. Have they not noticed the prominent cheekbones beneath Liz's sky blue eyes? Not to worry, there is a parody Elizabeth Warren song which features that aspect of her background as we shall see but for now let us watch "Run Liz Run" right after the jump:

Worrying that "the Democratic contest looks like it will be a foggy, repetitive march toward Hillary Clinton" and that there needs to be a primary challenger from Hillary Clinton's left to "energize the Democratic Party’s liberal base," CBS political director John Dickerson pounded out a July 17 piece at Slate.com urging the Bay State's senior senator,  "Run, Elizabeth, Run!" "Stop thinking and start running," urges a caption under a photograph of a pensive-looking Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) 

Sure, Warren most likely wouldn't win, but "she would till the ground, putting grit and the smell of earth in the contest" Dickerson insisted. Attempting to mask his partisan rooting interest as purely a political junkie's thought exercise at how to make the 2016 contest more robust and exciting, Dickerson compared Warren to the role Newt Gingrich played in the 2008 primary contest and later argued that conservatives should cheer Warren entering the race because she would help "expose" the socialist bent of the donkey party or "bruise Clinton" sufficiently to give the GOP a stronger chance at retaking the Oval Office (emphasis mine):

Hillary Clinton is touring to promote her State Department memoir “Hard Choices,” but most of the news she’s made along the way relates to her personal finances, not her tenure in Foggy Bottom. On Tuesday, New York magazine’s Jonathan Chait examined Hillary’s “dead broke” comment and other recent remarks and revelations about the Clintons’ money with an eye toward whether or not they’ll hamper her presumed presidential campaign.

Chait opined that while some of the Clintons’ “buckraking” constitutes “both a problem of perception and a problem of substance,” Hillary nonetheless has two big economic things going for her heading into 2016: voters’ memories of the strong economy during Bill’s presidency, and the near-certainty that if she becomes the nominee, her opponent will represent “a Republican Party still wedded to the upward redistribution of income as its central policy goal.”