After the Boston Herald reported that Elizabeth Warren listed herself as “Native American” while she was a professor at Harvard Law School, Sen. Scott Brown’s (R-MA) campaign quickly attacked his Democratic opponent for listing herself as a minority, insinuating that she did so for professional gain. “Prof. Warren needs to come clean about her motivations for making these claims and explain the contradictions between her rhetoric and the record,” said Brown campaign spokesman Jim Barnett.

But Warren, who is likely 1/32 Cherokee (though it’s unclear if her great-great-great grandmother was full-blooded), fought back against Brown’s accusations, saying she grew up discussing her Native American heritage and hoped to meet others who shared similar roots, according to the Boston Herald:

“I listed myself in the directory in the hopes that it might mean that I would be invited to a luncheon, a group something that might happen with people who are like I am. Nothing like that ever happened, that was clearly not the use for it and so I stopped checking it off,” said Warren.

The Harvard Law professor argued she didn’t use her minority status to get her teaching jobs, and slammed her Republican rival U.S. Sen.Scott Brown for suggesting otherwise.

“The only one as I understand it who’s raising any question about whether or not I was qualified for my job is Scott Brown and I think I am qualified and frankly I’m a little shocked to hear anybody raise a question about whether or not I’m qualified to hold a job teaching,” she said, pushing to put Brown on defense. “What does he think it takes for a woman to be qualified?”

Warren is right to be proud of her roots, and it is unfair for Brown’s campaign and others to attack her for it by accusing her of claiming minority status to improve her career. Native Americans faced discrimination and societal pressure to hide their backgrounds for years, and until 2005, Boston even had an antiquated law on the books that banned Native Americans from entering the city.

It is ignorant to attack Warren based on an arbitrary limit on how much Native American blood she has, when the tribe doesn’t even do that themselves. Just like Warren, the chief of the Cherokee Nation is only 1/32 Native American.

As he released six years’ worth of tax returns today, Sen. Scott Brown’s (R-MA) campaign predictably launched an attack on his Democratic opponent, Elizabeth Warren, for not being as forthright, saying in a press release that she is “clearly hiding something”:

“By refusing to release her tax returns for 2006 and 2007, she is clearly hiding something. What is in her tax returns during these years that Warren is so afraid voters might learn? In the interest of openness and transparency, Professor Warren has an obligation to release the same information that Scott Brown is making available.”

But Brown’s “very, very dear friend” Mitt Romney has refused to release more than two year’s worth of his own tax returns. Brown endorsed Romney in 2010, before the former Massachusetts governor even got into the race. And Romney adviser Eric Fehrnstrom, who also dismissed calls for more tax return transparency by saying “we think that’s sufficient,” is also an adviser to Brown.

If the Brown campaign is to be consistent, it must believe that Romney is “clearly hiding something” in his earlier tax returns that he is “afraid voters might learn.” And “in the interest of openness and transparency,” they would almost certainly say Romney “has an obligation to release the same information” that President Obama has made available — releasing 12 years worth of his tax returns.

The Brown campaign did not immediately respond to a request from ThinkProgress for his tax returns for 1998 through 2005 — years he served in the Massachusetts state legislature. One wonders if, by his own standard, his decision to release his returns only dating back to 2006 indicates he is “hiding something” he is “afraid voters might learn.”

What’s the worst thing a politician from Red Sox Nation could do? Taking money from the arch-rival Yankees might be high on the list. And that’s exactly what Sen. Scott Brown (R-MA) did.

Brown last month took the maximum $2,500 from Randy Levine, the president of the New York Yankees, according to newly released campaign finance records. “We’re happy to accept Randy Levine’s donation,” said Brown campaign spokesman Colin Reed.

Levine has rightly earned the enmity of Red Sox fans for years. He once accused the Red Sox of “riding our coattails” and attacked the club for allowing “an atmosphere of lawlessness…to be perpetuated” at Fenway Park. When the Yankees signed former Red Sox pitcher Roger Clemens in 2002, Levine took aim at the Sox for “whining” about “New York’s century of success.”

The conservative Boston Herald is not happy with Brown for taking Levine’s money: “That’s right, the commander of the Evil Empire is helping to pay for all those Brown ads championing his support of the Red Sox.” “It’s one thing to be bipartisan, Senator, but this is taking it a little too far. There’s no compromising in baseball,” the paper’s Joe Battenfeld added.

Indeed, the tabloid’s cover today rips Brown for his “Bronx Cheer,” a reference to the borough in which the Yankees play:

The Herald produced another image (above right) mocking Brown by dressing him up as a Yankees catcher. Meanwhile, New York news site DNAinfo is not pleased with Levine for giving to Brown.

This is the second strike for Brown in as many weeks on the Red Sox. Last week, he ran a radio ad touting that he stood up to political opponents who wanted to move the Red Sox out of historic Fenway Park. But as it turns out, Brown was one of those people, trying to arrange a meeting to move the team.

“What’s next, a Derek Jeter endorsement?” the Herald asked.

Boston sports teams are always a hot topic in Massachusetts political races, and with Major League Baseball’s Boston Red Sox celebrating their 100th season in legendary Fenway Park this summer, Massachusetts Sen. Scott Brown (R) is attempting to take advantage. Brown released a new ad this week about Fenway Park and the great memories Red Sox fans share there. In the ad, Brown praises Red Sox ownership for keeping the Red Sox in Fenway instead of moving them to a new stadium, a plan that was under consideration a decade ago.

BROWN: You know there’s been a lot of talk over the years about replacing the park. But that would have been a mistake. John Henry, Tom Werner and Larry Lucchino deserve credit for improving what we have instead of starting over somewhere else. Families throughout the years will never forget their first Fenway appearance.

Listen:

But as the Huffington Post’s Sam Stein found, Brown himself wanted to move the Red Sox to the Boston suburbs. “Exploring the possibility of a Red Sox relocation to Foxboro makes fiscal and economic sense,” Brown, then a state senator, wrote in January 2001. Brown was apparently alone with his proposal to move the Red Sox to Foxboro, a suburb 20 miles from Boston that is home to the National Football League’s New England Patriots, because Red Sox owners laughed it off. “The Red Sox belong in Boston where we have played for the last century,” team vice president Jim Healey said.

Ultimately, the Red Sox ignored Brown’s proposal and abandoned their own effort to build a new stadium, making this summer’s 100th anniversary celebration — and Brown’s misleading ad — a possibility.