Trump supporters shouldn't be talking.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-dy26HE28Gc
It should be the IDF but close enuf. :)
Printable View
Trump supporters shouldn't be talking.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-dy26HE28Gc
It should be the IDF but close enuf. :)
the bravery.
the courage.
https://i.imgur.com/grE9eVE.gif
Using a DNA test to lay claim to any connection to the Cherokee Nation or any tribal nation, even vaguely, is inappropriate and wrong. It makes a mockery out of DNA tests and its legitimate usesQuote:
Originally Posted by TheXFactor
https://www.cherokee.org/News/Storie...rrens-DNA-test
I'll spice it up, creating a lil buz on the alt right.
Dems get totally pwned but it's racist and offensive AF but LOLOL
Viewers discretion is advised.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=1&v=gatXo854Eqk
I don't understand it, either.Quote:
Originally Posted by duped_samaritan
Did she not realize she would be roundly mocked for this?
When I saw the headline on CNN (which made it look like the release of the DNA test was a triumph), I figured I would click on the story and see that she was 12% Native or something.
When I read the DNA report and saw the "one ancestor 6-10 generations ago" thing, I lol'd my face off.
It's amazing how experienced politicians can do really dumb things sometimes.
Druff, you are missing the point. Warren conveyed the story of her long-ago NA heritage that her mother told her per what was family lore. The DNA results confirm that the story was true even though it was of a long ago ancestor. And that confirmation means that Warren wasn’t lying about her “tiny” NA heritage. Contrast that with someone like Trump, who compulsive self-promotingly lies so much, noone should trust if he could honestly tell them what the weather was outside if it even minutely benefited him to lie about it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan DruffI don't understand it, either.Quote:
Originally Posted by duped_samaritan
Did she not realize she would be roundly mocked for this?
When I saw the headline on CNN (which made it look like the release of the DNA test was a triumph), I figured I would click on the story and see that she was 12% Native or something.
When I read the DNA report and saw the "one ancestor 6-10 generations ago" thing, I lol'd my face off.
It's amazing how experienced politicians can do really dumb things sometimes.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MumblesBadlyDruff, you are missing the point. Warren conveyed the story of her long-ago NA heritage that her mother told her per what was family lore. The DNA results confirm that the story was true even though it was of a long ago ancestor. And that confirmation means that Warren wasn’t lying about her “tiny” NA heritage. Contrast that with someone like Trump, who compulsive self-promotingly lies so much, noone should trust if he could honestly tell them what the weather was outside if it even minutely benefited him to lie about it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Druff
She didn't just convey a story.
In 1995, she actually filed paperwork at Harvard to (falsely) list her race as Native American.
Why would she have done this?
Clearly she was taking advantage of a story of a very distant ancestor being Native American, and using it in order to advance her career at Harvard, where simply being white is considered boring. By suddenly becoming a minority, she probably felt she could command more respect and earn more victim cred points.
There's no reasonable explanation as to why she filed the paperwork to change this, especially given that she never believed she was any more than a tiny bit Native American.
The whole thing was exploitative and dishonest. While admittedly it's not a huge deal in the grand scheme of things, it's laughable that she thinks releasing a DNA report indicating she might be 0.1% Native American somehow vindicates her.
Many years before this Warren controversy, "Family Guy" did an episode where Peter learns that hundreds of years ago, one of his ancestors was a black slave.
This causes Peter to suddenly identify as black (despite clearly being lily-white), take on an African name, and attend black power rallies.
The continuous running joke of the episode comes from the fact that Peter suddenly believes a distant ancestor being black qualifies him to be considered black, despite being white and living his entire life as a white man.
That's basically what Elizabeth Warren did, except she was even worse. Peter Griffin is portrayed as too dumb to realize the absurdity of what he's doing. Warren clearly knew, and took on the Native American identity in order to get "minority cred" at her job at Harvard.
She took advantage of something because she could.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan DruffQuote:
Originally Posted by MumblesBadly
She didn't just convey a story.
In 1995, she actually filed paperwork at Harvard to (falsely) list her race as Native American.
Why would she have done this?
Clearly she was taking advantage of a story of a very distant ancestor being Native American, and using it in order to advance her career at Harvard, where simply being white is considered boring. By suddenly becoming a minority, she probably felt she could command more respect and earn more victim cred points.
There's no reasonable explanation as to why she filed the paperwork to change this, especially given that she never believed she was any more than a tiny bit Native American.
The whole thing was exploitative and dishonest. While admittedly it's not a huge deal in the grand scheme of things, it's laughable that she thinks releasing a DNA report indicating she might be 0.1% Native American somehow vindicates her.
Did she break any laws?
She claimed a distant ancestor to be Native American and it's true.
The system in place that allows such distant ancestors to count is the real issue, is it not?
She worked the system to her benefit. I'd probably do the same to be perfectly honest.
In Australia we have a somewhat similar issue.
If you have an Aboriginal ancestor you're entitled to identify as aboriginal and you get HEAPS of extra benefits from our government.
Lots of small things like you go to the top of lists when seeking government assistance, and much bigger things like if you want government housing, instead of waiting several years you get a place almost immediately.
Hard to hate on those who play the system because they can, if I had an aboriginal ancestor I'd be claiming whatever they feel obliged to give to me. :)
:wrongQuote:
Originally Posted by Dan DruffQuote:
Originally Posted by MumblesBadly
She didn't just convey a story.
In 1995, she actually filed paperwork at Harvard to (falsely) list her race as Native American.
Why would she have done this?
Clearly she was taking advantage of a story of a very distant ancestor being Native American, and using it in order to advance her career at Harvard, where simply being white is considered boring. By suddenly becoming a minority, she probably felt she could command more respect and earn more victim cred points.
There's no reasonable explanation as to why she filed the paperwork to change this, especially given that she never believed she was any more than a tiny bit Native American.
The whole thing was exploitative and dishonest. While admittedly it's not a huge deal in the grand scheme of things, it's laughable that she thinks releasing a DNA report indicating she might be 0.1% Native American somehow vindicates her.
Druff, her excellent teaching and research advanced her career, not her NA heritage claim. See the middle third of this vid for some insight into what was behind her career success.
https://youtu.be/RHzbdZuVyAM
By the middle 2000s, her research propelled her to become one of the top experts in the country on bankrupcty law and reform, and had presciently brought to light how dangerouosly exposed the US middle class had become to severe risk of financial ruin.
https://youtu.be/akVL7QY0S8A
Harvard, however, got the benefit from her changing her ancestry info in its marketing of the diversity of its faculty.
Druff should take the DNA test, he's probably more American-Indian than Pocahontas.Quote:
During a July 5 rally in Montana, Trump said: "I’m going to get one of those little [DNA testing] kits and in the middle of the debate, when she proclaims she’s of Indian heritage... And we will say, ‘I will give you a million dollars, paid for by Trump, to your favorite charity, if you take the test and it shows you’re an Indian.' And we’ll see what she does. I have a feeling she will say no, but we will hold it for the debates."
On Monday morning, White House counselor Kellyanne Conway brushed off the results of Warren's test as "junk science," telling reporters: "I haven’t looked at the test. I know that everybody likes to pick their junk science or sound science depending on the conclusion, it seems some days... But I haven’t looked at the DNA test and it really doesn’t interest me."
https://www.zerohedge.com/sites/defa...?itok=LqGYltn5
Has anyone else noticed how Les has really stepped up his game to make up for BGC's absence?
https://youtu.be/AYQfurgIiwg
Probably anyone who has had ancestors living in the US for 5+ generations has some % of American Indian and African blood. For how long her gene pool has been in the US, Warren is probably on the low end as far as diversity goes.
Also, I am guessing the DNA tests are being interpreted in the most generous way possible for political reasons. I dunno the exact specifics of whatever DNA test she took, but the way they generally work is that certain alleles are overrepresented in certain populations, but not exclusive to those populations. So there is a significant chance that she actually has no Native American ancestors at all, and instead has a Caucasian ancestor that has an allele that is rare in Caucasian populations, but more abundant in Native Americans.
Anyways, I think the takaway is that for all intensive purposes it was dishonest of her to represent herself as a Native American, and dishonest of Harvard to identify her as such for their own reasons. And whether you want to look disfavorably on her or Harvard for their dishonesty is your choice, and will probably be heavily swayed by your personal political ideology.
She had no idea that this would come back to haunt her so many years later, or else she wouldn't have done it.
Like the rapist in the 70's who had no idea DNA would eventually be discovered and come back to bite their ass.
Amazing the twists and turns of logic that would lead anyone to think .001 is actually proof of her native ancestry, or that it gave her a right to claim herself as a native to reap the benefits of identity politics.
This is one of the biggest selfpwns I've ever seen, yesterday was one of the best days of the Trump presidency IMO based on the LOLs alone, and I'm so glad we get to do it again today because I need a laugh.
Considering that the average white American has more Native DNA than her, it's entirely possible that this was a lie. In America, these kind of tales are extremely common. With younger Hispanic (who actually have Mexican indigenous roots) and black mixed progressive kids, claiming Native American heritage to seem more unique and oppressed is a thing now too. Basically any white person can say the had a great, great, great - however many Cherokee grandpa, have the same test done and the results will likely come back with more DNA percentage.Quote:
Originally Posted by MumblesBadlyDruff, you are missing the point. Warren conveyed the story of her long-ago NA heritage that her mother told her per what was family lore. The DNA results confirm that the story was true even though it was of a long ago ancestor. And that confirmation means that Warren wasn’t lying about her “tiny” NA heritage. Contrast that with someone like Trump, who compulsive self-promotingly lies so much, noone should trust if he could honestly tell them what the weather was outside if it even minutely benefited him to lie about it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Druff
Quote:
Originally Posted by VaughnP
so explain the conservative outrage and trump literally denying he said what he literally said about the milly?
also if anyone can explain to me why she wouldnt apologize to the cherokee nation after they released that statement, im all ears.
like seriously wouldnt it just be common courtesy to do so?
It's one thing to claim it, it's another to use it for gain. Trump is obviously gonna Trump and try to milk this even more than he already has. I had no idea he is denying it. But the point is she offered no conclusive evidence anyway. The 1700s? And am I reading it wrong or were the results not entirely definitive?Quote:
Originally Posted by sonatineQuote:
Originally Posted by VaughnP
so explain the conservative outrage and trump literally denying he said what he literally said about the milly?
My understanding is the results are not definitive, but she may have had a Native American ancestor at some point many generations ago. To noone surprise the dishonest media has basically taken over the narrative and is spinning it into a definitive, because well they are dishonest.Quote:
Originally Posted by VaughnPIt's one thing to claim it, it's another to use it for gain. Trump is obviously gonna Trump and try to milk this even more than he already has. I had no idea he is denying it. But the point is she offered no conclusive evidence anyway. The 1700s? And am I reading it wrong or were the results not entirely definitive?Quote:
Originally Posted by sonatine
That being said, the fact she has an oral family history indicating an Indian ancestor way way back probably means she did, all else being equal. Whether Harvard should be calling someone Native American who has lived their entire life with a white identity because they had one Native American ancestor 10 generations ago is of course an entirely different question. And it is probably a bad political idea that she herself has leaned into it as heavily as she has.
Given that Druff is Ashkenazi, I'm wonder what percentage of his DNA is Semitic in origin, as intermingling with Europeans over the centuries has apparently reduced the average percentage of such DNA among Ashkenazi to about 20%-30%.Quote:
Originally Posted by TheXFactor
https://youtu.be/SZAfdrPuj74
c
What little i looked at this apparently 1/32 is something that matters. Enough that Cherokee Nations Principal Chief is only 1/32. No idea what that title means.
Warren had been told she was 1/32. Never gave her any benefit worth mentioning. Boston Globe interviewed something like 31 of her colleagues from Harvard and none of them remembered it ever mattering. She didn't fill any minority quota.
The DNA test proves that at best she was 1/64. That's from pure Native DNA. There's was like 15x DNA that couldn't be assigned to any ethnicity. That means she could've had a 5th generation Native ancestor esp. if he/she was mixed as well.
7th generation is the first generation where it's almost guaranteed you don't get DNA from all the ancestors of that generation (128). The upper bound for inherited DNA is 120ish ancestors per generation. You only get DNA from less than half of your 8th generation ancestors.
I'm really enjoying the left's current obession with racial purity.
One drop rule, kids.
MumblesShitly ruined
I don’t think the trial ballon on a Warren POTUS run is going as expected, to her anyway.
Probably for the best for her and the party. She’s going to be re-elected as long as she wants so she might as well become a leading figure in the senate for the rest of her life.
Average white American doesn't have more Native blood. You can't compare average to a lower bound and make conclusions based on that anymore than you can use the upper bound. It's not how numbers fuck. You don't just get choose whatever number you feel like.Quote:
Originally Posted by VaughnPConsidering that the average white American has more Native DNA than her, it's entirely possible that this was a lie. In America, these kind of tales are extremely common. With younger Hispanic (who actually have Mexican indigenous roots) and black mixed progressive kids, claiming Native American heritage to seem more unique and oppressed is a thing now too. Basically any white person can say the had a great, great, great - however many Cherokee grandpa, have the same test done and the results will likely come back with more DNA percentage.Quote:
Originally Posted by MumblesBadly
You can only compare an average to an average in this context. I don't care enough to find out what Warren's average would be, but it's higher than 0,18. 9th generation already covers that.
Pretty much the narrative of this thread is to make the person telling the truth look bad. She never said her percentage Native she is..she said she is Native. All you idiots debating percents should watch the Brewers win vs. A large $ market...tell me the percent per/win/salary ratio it is, please.
Trump can lick my sweaty nuts and anyone who votes for him can too.
Line up you sweaty fuckers. Dishwasher first
..
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam Snead
Quote:
Originally Posted by thesidedish
She's native like at least a third of the United states is native. Sux that u faggots have to shill for this stuff. U dont HAVE to do it, but u aren't any good to figure it out to let the current D party die for now is ur best play
Self centered narcissist (like every person that would ever consider running for pouts) deluded herself into thinking part of her good looks came from a comment her probably crazy aunt said "u got such nice high cheekbones cuz we're part Indian" and should now know she's a loony toon for thinking that but probably too old now to admit to herself how much of a stooge she was thinking that for 40-50 years
Funny you should mention that...Quote:
Originally Posted by TheXFactor
https://youtu.be/9NwH8Tik7Hs
https://youtu.be/mirZQ64xf1A
Ahh yes, and lets now add "welcher" to Trunp's list of accomplishments.Quote:
Originally Posted by thesidedish
#winnerswinning