That snopes says fauxcohantas’ home was worth $500k in 1995....hmmm
Printable View
That snopes says fauxcohantas’ home was worth $500k in 1995....hmmm
I'm using the lower bound in reference to what you said "I'm pretty secure in stating that anyone who is between 1/64th...". You know in the sense that the Cherokee Nation doesn't appear to agree with your lower bound.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Druff
Funny how you chide me regarding using the "upper bounds" of 1/1024th to make my point, and then you try to make your point using the lower bounds of 1/64th.Quote:
Originally Posted by gimmick
Current Principal Chief of the Cherokee Nation 1/64 Native.
Warren was up front in that she believed she had 5th generation ancestor. The DNA report didn't disprove that. It only proved that she had at least one distant relative. Not only or just, as the right keeps claiming. DNA reports don't prove that sort of things.
Oh and regarding ethnicity there's currently 5 major groups. White, black, yellow, red and jew. I assume it's because of the work of Israeli scientists and their policy of Nationality by blood. Not really sure any other country does that. Anyway in DNA research Jews aren't Caucasian. If it helps, in that sense Warren is indeed whiter than you're.
Where did that DNA test report say she had "at least" one distant relative. I read the report myself BEFORE reading any criticism from the right wing media (in fact, I caught it early enough when the mainstream media and left were fawning over how she just owned Trump with it), and I was shocked to see that it was pretty clear about it just being one relative 6-10 generations ago.
If one had to come up with a "best guess" from the DNA test, it would be one relative 8 generations ago. That's basically negligible. You can't identify with a race because of one ancestor 8 generations ago. It makes you look like a fool.
For the "at least" part you have to know what DNA reports do and how they work. They prove things, they don't disprove. That is why "just" isn't a wording that can be used. The 6-10 generation single ancestor comes from the distinct strings (unique to Natives) they can find (the amount and length) and the probability they would have survived through the generations. Whatever they can't properly assign mostly increases the ratio of "colored" blood once it's properly identified.
What she said is nothing remotely similar.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Druff
"I am not a citizen of a tribe. Tribal citizenship is very different from ancestry. Tribes -- and only tribes -- determine tribal citizenship, and I respect that difference."
She has never claimed or sought tribal citizenship. And i wouldn't say she's ever claimed to be a person of color. Now her opponents are under the impression she has said that and they brought this shit up in 2012. I doubt too many persons of color think that from anything she has said or done.
we may be splitting hairs as to what she did or did not claim. she may not have claimed "tribal citizenship" but she did self-identify as native american. this was absurdly dishonest and i imagine highly offensive to actual native americansQuote:
Originally Posted by gimmickWhat she said is nothing remotely similar.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Druff
"I am not a citizen of a tribe. Tribal citizenship is very different from ancestry. Tribes -- and only tribes -- determine tribal citizenship, and I respect that difference."
She has never claimed or sought tribal citizenship. And i wouldn't say she's ever claimed to be a person of color. Now her opponents are under the impression she has said that and they brought this shit up in 2012. I doubt too many persons of color think that from anything she has said or done.
https://theintercept.com/2018/10/16/...rican-harvard/Quote:
But in the 1986-1987 edition of the Association of American Law School’s directory and eight subsequent editions, Warren listed herself as a minority. She began identifying as Native American on personnel forms three years into her post at the University of Pennsylvania.
She ticked an extra box for whatever hippie reasons. Yup "highly offensive". Totally the worst. The amount of tears shed on the side of a highway for this one.Quote:
Originally Posted by blakewe may be splitting hairs as to what she did or did not claim. she may not have claimed "tribal citizenship" but she did self-identify as native american. this was absurdly dishonest and i imagine highly offensive to actual native americansQuote:
Originally Posted by gimmick
https://theintercept.com/2018/10/16/...rican-harvard/Quote:
But in the 1986-1987 edition of the Association of American Law School’s directory and eight subsequent editions, Warren listed herself as a minority. She began identifying as Native American on personnel forms three years into her post at the University of Pennsylvania.
you said she never claimed to be a woman of color. do you not consider native americans to be “of color?” cause she 100% claimed that in writing.Quote:
Originally Posted by gimmickShe ticked an extra box for whatever hippie reasons. Yup "highly offensive". Totally the worst. The amount of tears shed on the side of a highway for this one.Quote:
Originally Posted by blake
in lieu of giving a standard gimmick dodging response that doesn’t address this question, maybe just admit you were wrong and let’s move on with our days
Yea this is her take on it, "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," said Warren. "Nothing like that ever happened, that was clearly not the use for it and so I stopped checking it off."Quote:
Originally Posted by blakeyou said she never claimed to be a woman of color. do you not consider native americans to be “of color?” cause she 100% claimed that in writing.Quote:
Originally Posted by gimmickShe ticked an extra box for whatever hippie reasons. Yup "highly offensive". Totally the worst. The amount of tears shed on the side of a highway for this one.Quote:
Originally Posted by blake
in lieu of giving a standard gimmick dodging response that doesn’t address this question, maybe just admit you were wrong and let’s move on with our days
She ticked one additional box in voluntary self-report forms. The one i've seen has no qualifications or anything besides a row of boxes.
The article you linked has the usual list of stuff that's just blatantly false (like "Warren has some Native American ancestry — a bit less than the average white American"), moving the goal post and being offended for someone else. In other words it's shit. Wordy shit, but shit none the less.
what does "I wanted to meet people like myself" even mean? who did she want to meet? fake native americans? white people? you're pretty generous when it comes to accepting absurd explanations from liberals.Quote:
Originally Posted by gimmickYea this is her take on it, "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," said Warren. "Nothing like that ever happened, that was clearly not the use for it and so I stopped checking it off."Quote:
Originally Posted by blakeyou said she never claimed to be a woman of color. do you not consider native americans to be “of color?” cause she 100% claimed that in writing.Quote:
Originally Posted by gimmick
in lieu of giving a standard gimmick dodging response that doesn’t address this question, maybe just admit you were wrong and let’s move on with our days
She ticked one additional box in voluntary self-report forms. The one i've seen has no qualifications or anything besides a row of boxes.
The article you linked has the usual list of stuff that's just blatantly false (like "Warren has some Native American ancestry — a bit less than the average white American"), moving the goal post and being offended for someone else. In other words it's shit. Wordy shit, but shit none the less.
also if you just use google, you can find 1,000,000 articles from native americans or other minorites being offended by warren. and yes they are all liberal.
anyway, at least one point is undisputed. for years, warren identified herself as a native american instead of caucasian. we can disagree as to what adjectives or adverbs we use to characterize that conduct, but it did happen
I think the "luncheon" in the quote gives some idea who she meant with people like her. Didn't sound like she was looking for a hookup to the next powwow.Quote:
Originally Posted by blakewhat does "I wanted to meet people like myself" even mean? who did she want to meet? fake native americans? white people? you're pretty generous when it comes to accepting absurd explanations from liberals.Quote:
Originally Posted by gimmickYea this is her take on it, "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," said Warren. "Nothing like that ever happened, that was clearly not the use for it and so I stopped checking it off."Quote:
Originally Posted by blake
She ticked one additional box in voluntary self-report forms. The one i've seen has no qualifications or anything besides a row of boxes.
The article you linked has the usual list of stuff that's just blatantly false (like "Warren has some Native American ancestry — a bit less than the average white American"), moving the goal post and being offended for someone else. In other words it's shit. Wordy shit, but shit none the less.
also if you just use google, you can find 1,000,000 articles from native americans or other minorites being offended by warren. and yes they are all liberal.
anyway, at least one point is undisputed. for years, warren identified herself as a native american instead of caucasian. we can disagree as to what adjectives or adverbs we use to characterize that conduct, but it did happen
Minorities that are offended by anything she has proven to have done are kinda non existent. She didn't take a minority spot at any school and there's no proof she had anything to do with Harvard using her as an example of minority. That shit's on Harvard alone.
In general Natives don't care about weekend Indians. The list of things to be highly offended for them isn't 1. genocide 2. Elizabeth Warren. Mostly i've seen wokest minorities and white people telling other people what they should be offended about. There might some mildly native person that's convinced his/her commitment to being a skin every other weekend entitles him/her to have opinion about it, but i haven't seen anything from anyone that has any relevant position in any tribe.
The Cherokee position was that, if she doesn't claim a tribe they don't care.
Separate from the NA tribal leadership caring about how people qualify as a tribal member, they overwhelmingly they support Warren in this mattee despite any supposed offense that has been trumped up in some sloppy initial reporting on the matter.Quote:
Originally Posted by gimmickIn general Natives don't care about weekend Indians. The list of things to be highly offended for them isn't 1. genocide 2. Elizabeth Warren. Mostly i've seen wokest minorities and white people telling other people what they should be offended about. There might some mildly native person that's convinced his/her commitment to being a skin every other weekend entitles him/her to have opinion about it, but i haven't seen anything from anyone that has any relevant position in any tribe.Quote:
Originally Posted by blake
The Cherokee position was that, if she doesn't claim a tribe they don't care.
Mainstream Media Is Blowing Its Coverage Of Elizabeth Warren’s DNA Test
Tribal leaders and Native people say the senator is an ally — and they support her look at her ancestry. But hardly anyone asked them.
https://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_5...b0432554c512bb
#FauxOutrageFail
Give it up Druff. Only GOPers and corporatist Dems are hoping this supposed outrage has traction against Warren in 2020.
does the secretary of state of the cherokee nation constitute someone from "a relevant position"?Quote:
Originally Posted by gimmickI think the "luncheon" in the quote gives some idea who she meant with people like her. Didn't sound like she was looking for a hookup to the next powwow.Quote:
Originally Posted by blakewhat does "I wanted to meet people like myself" even mean? who did she want to meet? fake native americans? white people? you're pretty generous when it comes to accepting absurd explanations from liberals.Quote:
Originally Posted by gimmick
also if you just use google, you can find 1,000,000 articles from native americans or other minorites being offended by warren. and yes they are all liberal.
anyway, at least one point is undisputed. for years, warren identified herself as a native american instead of caucasian. we can disagree as to what adjectives or adverbs we use to characterize that conduct, but it did happen
Minorities that are offended by anything she has proven to have done are kinda non existent. She didn't take a minority spot at any school and there's no proof she had anything to do with Harvard using her as an example of minority. That shit's on Harvard alone.
In general Natives don't care about weekend Indians. The list of things to be highly offended for them isn't 1. genocide 2. Elizabeth Warren. Mostly i've seen wokest minorities and white people telling other people what they should be offended about. There might some mildly native person that's convinced his/her commitment to being a skin every other weekend entitles him/her to have opinion about it, but i haven't seen anything from anyone that has any relevant position in any tribe.
The Cherokee position was that, if she doesn't claim a tribe they don't care.
Quote is still up at the official cherokee newsroom http://www.anadisgoi.com/2263-cherok...-dna-test.htmlQuote:
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 uses while also dishonoring legitimate tribal governments and their citizens, whose ancestors are well documented and whose heritage is proven. Senator Warren is undermining tribal interests with her continued claims of tribal heritage."
(Note the absurdity of needing an official quote from a racial or ethnic group. Who would speak for white people?)
Mumbles, did you just read the headline and not the actual story?Quote:
Originally Posted by MumblesBadlySeparate from the NA tribal leadership caring about how people qualify as a tribal member, they overwhelmingly they support Warren in this mattee despite any supposed offense that has been trumped up in some sloppy initial reporting on the matter.Quote:
Originally Posted by gimmick
Mainstream Media Is Blowing Its Coverage Of Elizabeth Warren’s DNA Test
Tribal leaders and Native people say the senator is an ally — and they support her look at her ancestry. But hardly anyone asked them.
https://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_5...b0432554c512bb
#FauxOutrageFail
Give it up Druff. Only GOPers and corporatist Dems are hoping this supposed outrage has traction against Warren in 2020.
From the same piece:
"Using a DNA test to lay claim to any connection to the Cherokee Nation or any tribal nation, even vaguely, is inappropriate and wrong,” read Hoskin’s statement (which no longer appears to be on the tribe’s site but does appear on Anadisgoi, the official Cherokee Nation newsroom). “Senator Warren is undermining tribal interests with her continued claims of tribal heritage.”
"It’s a brutal statement. And it reflects legitimate anger felt by some Native people over Warren’s handling of the situation. "
"A Cherokee Nation spokesperson did not initially respond to a request for comment on whether Hoskin was speaking on behalf of the tribe or for himself in his statement or whether Principal Chief Bill John Baker agreed with him. But after this story was published, spokeswoman Amanda Clinton emailed to say Hoskin does speak for the tribe."
literally, the cherokee tribe itself was offended by warren. is that not good enough?
also lol at "corporatist dems" being offended. like CNN and the NYT?
I’m generally less concerned about her Native American background and more concerned about the fact that she would probably nationalize the banks with in the first three months of taking office.
i should add that even though i think warren's a terrible candidate, i would vote for her over trump in 2020 cause i think trump is legit brain damaged
not being brain damaged is still the number one qualification i'm looking for in a candidate
Yea Hoskin works under this dude...Quote:
Originally Posted by blakedoes the secretary of state of the cherokee nation constitute someone from "a relevant position"?Quote:
Originally Posted by gimmickI think the "luncheon" in the quote gives some idea who she meant with people like her. Didn't sound like she was looking for a hookup to the next powwow.Quote:
Originally Posted by blake
Minorities that are offended by anything she has proven to have done are kinda non existent. She didn't take a minority spot at any school and there's no proof she had anything to do with Harvard using her as an example of minority. That shit's on Harvard alone.
In general Natives don't care about weekend Indians. The list of things to be highly offended for them isn't 1. genocide 2. Elizabeth Warren. Mostly i've seen wokest minorities and white people telling other people what they should be offended about. There might some mildly native person that's convinced his/her commitment to being a skin every other weekend entitles him/her to have opinion about it, but i haven't seen anything from anyone that has any relevant position in any tribe.
The Cherokee position was that, if she doesn't claim a tribe they don't care.
Quote is still up at the official cherokee newsroom http://www.anadisgoi.com/2263-cherok...-dna-test.htmlQuote:
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 uses while also dishonoring legitimate tribal governments and their citizens, whose ancestors are well documented and whose heritage is proven. Senator Warren is undermining tribal interests with her continued claims of tribal heritage."
(Note the absurdity of needing an official quote from a racial or ethnic group. Who would speak for white people?)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YCLHNYC6piY
...who still doesn't care.
All the objections came from claiming tribal membership (something she didn't do in any official capacity). That thing was sorted few months ago.
They especially object to using DNA report in determining tribal affiliation. Something DNA reports currently can't do. They can't tell a difference between Natives from North- or South-America. That is why they use samples from South-America. It's not something they have mistakenly been doing for 15 years.
Hoskin isn't speaking on behalf of a race. Tribes have laws, borders and governing bodies. Pretty much any entity like that has people speaking for them. Like every nation on Earth. Not that absurd tbh.
This one response by one tribe isn’t the majority response. And it’s likely driven by the politics around qualifications for tribal membership, which have considerable monetary consequences. I’m guessing that the Cherokee tribe has a lot of folks petitioning them for tribal membership for sentimental reasons related to family lore given the extremely large geographic range of where Cherokee have lived in the US...Quote:
Originally Posted by blake
https://youtu.be/Z6E98ZRaU1s
... But that conflicts with the tribe’s unofficial policy of trying to limit official membership because of the potential dilution of claims on money generated by the tribe. So, yeah. Warren’s specific claim of Cherokee heritage even though the DNA testing isn’t remotely indicative of that particular tribe is likely to generate a knee-jerk negative response from that tribe’s leadership regardless of other ways Warren is supportive of Native tribes.
And yes, both CNN and the New York Times are solidly aligned with corporate Dems. Or are you that dense about the politics of those major news outlets?
shutup mumbles