By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Politics Discussion - Elizabeth Warren Becomes An Even Bigger Joke.

LudicrousSpeed said:

lol, “coming out now talking about” the whole hiring situation... try like a decade ago. This is old, long debunked conspiracy nonsense revived by our dumber than a bag of rocks President, who has lies and actions a thousand times worse than being mistaken about your heritage.

She put white on her job applications and didn’t apply or receive any minority scholarships. I’m amazed at the conservatives (in general, not anyone here) wasting time going so hard on this but I guess when your trash bag President gets one of his zany ideas the rest gotta fall in line. 

Oh, yes, she put white on everything, but somehow got labeled a minority in the Association of American Law Schools records.  And was touted as Harvard's first woman of color.  I'm sure that happens all the time.  She also didn't seem to be in any rush to change it. And just you know, she only put white when applying for school.  But, when it came to get a job, in an environment that was feeling pressure to hire minorities, she sure whipped that out real quick.

And who's wasting time on this?  Oh, yea, that would be Warren, who brought this back up in some feeble attempt at a presidential run.  She had Trump so bad in her head she felt the need to do this big announcement 22 days before the mid-terms, when she should be focused on winning them for her side.  And the MSM who is wasting time defending her ridiculous <2% standard, as well as misquoting Trump on the actual bet.  Oh, but they would never do that.  Well, except for 3 times in just as many days.  First about Lee, then about his response to Ford, and now this.

SpokenTruth said:
She never put minority on an application or entrance forms.

So how do you get hired as a minority if you don't list yourself as a minority?

Wrong.  When applying for school, she always put white.  But, when it came time to get a job, she had herself listed as a minority.  With the God awful excuse that she though it would get her invited to luncheons.  If you want to believe that, I got a bridge to sell.

Jumpin said:
thismeintiel said:

Blame the Dems on that one.  They have been running on identity politics for decades.  If anything, the Warren thing proves how full of crap they really are.  If you are a Dem you can claim you are whatever you want, take a job from whatever minority you wish, just as long as you tow the line.


You are aware racial politics has existed in the US for the entire existence of the nation, correct?

In some form or another.  But, in the past 50 years or so it has been ratcheted up to a point of no comparison.

pokoko said:

I don't doubt that people are walking away.  I want nothing to do with the "Left".  Of course, after watching people on the "Right" do the exact same thing with Trump's many, many lies, it's not like anyone is going to seek shelter in that direction, either.  Trump could tell us he's half black and start using "nigga" in his speeches and FOX News would run a one hour special celebrating him as the first Real American minority President.  As for this particular situation, though, who really gives a damn?  I don't.  On the list of lies told by politicians, this is one where all I can do is shrug.  I literally do not care about this one way or another and most people are probably rolling their eyes over the whole thing relative to both sides trying to make a big deal out of it.

As far as hypocrisy goes, wouldn't that also apply to people who make a big deal about one fabrication yet suddenly turn blind about others?  We have a lot of people on this website who seem to get outraged by the bad behavior of politicians ... but only when it comes from one side.  I really don't want to hear about hypocrisy from that group.

If it's creating more Independents or Libertarians, that's fine by me.  Your example with Trump is pretty silly, though.  I agree that they make too many excuses for him, but they would definitely not go that far.  Some radicals may, but the majority would not.  Of course, Trump, while not always good at self-awareness, is still more self-aware than that.  The Dems, however, are already proving, right now, that they would go that far for their guy/gal. 

I think right now a lot of the fight from the Right has more to do with not allowing Dems to create some weird standards going forward.  With Kavanaugh, it was the principle of innocent until proven guilty, which they wanted to turn into "guilty until proven innocent, unless it's one of our guys."  With this one, we can't have someone with less than 2% of minority DNA claiming to be a minority.  At that point, we are ALL minorities.  Which also means that NONE of us are minorities.  It's ridiculous.  And it seems funny to me that the party of the minority doesn't seem to care that the actual Cherokee Nation put out a statement discrediting Warren and her claims.

I will tell you this is all from someone who could not bring himself to vote for Trump in 2016.  He had too many faults in his record, in my opinion.  But, he became our president, anyway.  I do plan to vote for him in 2020, though, as his policies have actually brought some good things.  I think there will be a lot like me.



Around the Network
thismeintiel said: 
Jumpin said:

You are aware racial politics has existed in the US for the entire existence of the nation, correct?

In some form or another.  But, in the past 50 years or so it has been ratcheted up to a point of no comparison.

Hm... what happened in the USA a good 50 years ago?



Legend11 correctly predicted that GTA IV (360+PS3) would outsell SSBB. I was wrong.

A Biased Review Reloaded / Open Your Eyes / Switch Gamers Club

SuaveSocialist said:
Is it surprising that Beloved Leader is shitting the bed after being shown verifiable evidence that undermines him?
No, it’s just his usual pattern of idiocy. I wonder how he’d react if he was told the Earth revolves around the Sun. If only H.P. Lovecraft were still alive; then maybe we’d get an accurate description of such a freak-out.

Undermines her, you mean.  He asked for proof she was Native American.  She actually provided him with proof of the exact opposite.  In an attempt to bash him, she played herself.



ugh, just another instance showing Republicans/Trump refuse to ever admit they are wrong despite the facts.

The Republican Party: the party of lies, immorality, insults, and doubling down on all of the above when the facts don't support them which is pretty close to all the time.






Around the Network

When I applied to college last year I did something similar. I put Asian and Hispanic as race since I'd have a better chance to get in but I am part Asian and my mom is white but she's from south America so I guess it works.



h2ohno said:

LOL. Nice. 



Just throwing a reminder for everyone to keep it respectful in here. Nothing really bad thus far, just getting it in here just in case. :)



NND: 0047-7271-7918 | XBL: Nights illusion | PSN: GameNChick

Not sure if anyone pointed this out yet, but the math in the OP is incorrect (or rather, the words surrounding the math). The math discussing what percent Native American she is is not telling you that. Instead, it is telling you what percentage of her DNA on average came from one 6th-10th generation ancestor. Basically it assumes that every one of her ancestors had 0% Native American DNA.

As the OP later acknowledges, the average white American does have some small amount of Native American DNA. The actual number here is about 0.18%.

If you assume that all of Warrens other ancestors had an average amount of Native American DNA and one Native American ancestor 6-10 generations ago with 95% Native American DNA, she would have 0.27-1.66% Native American DNA which is 150-922% more Native American DNA than other white Americans. This is making several assumptions, but the original paper makes it clear that this is strong evidence of an unadmixed Native American ancestor within 10 generations. Take from that what you will.



irstupid said:
Hiku said:

I don't find her heritage interesting. Though Trump kept goading her into taking the DNA test, much like he did with Obama's birth certificate. Racial obsession is his thing, not mine.
But she took it, and she's 5-6 generations  descendant from a native american or something? Ok, whatever.

She is at best 6 generations, possibly 10. There is no 5. Don't try and move the stats like everyone seemed to do with James Gunn. You know, how his tweets were anywhere from 5-12 years ago, but EVERYONE always only said a dozen years ago.

I didn't believe that anyone in here would argue about about +/- 1 generation.
I said 5-6, and I put a question mark at the end, in reference to what someone in this topic said. Specifically Puppyroach's comment here:
"it means it goes back 6 generations (technically 5 since we should count the original parents as the first generation)"

I said I didn't find this interesting. It did not occur to you that I can't move any stats because I don't care enough to read through the article to find any, before you make accusations? I skimmed through the comments section here because I want to see if people I interact with on a daily basis care, or if they share my opinion. That's relevant to me. And that's where I came across Puppyroach's comment.

And regarding James Gunn, stop generalizing and implying some hypocracy or double standard that isn't there. It sounds like nothing but projection of your own tendencies when you do that. Especially to me. The only thing I ever said about James Gunn was "You can't say things like that and expect to work for Disney."

Whoops?
Can you stop doing that from now on, or are you just going to continue and hope you get lucky and say it to the right person?
As someone who supported the firing of James Gunn, I should not have to tell you why your comment should not be brought up in a reply to me as as if it's a point against anything I said.
And it's not the first time this has happened.
Whenever it does, all it tells me is that you're probably someone who thinks this way, so you assume that the person you talk to is likely the same. Hence the projection. Except in this case, I'm demonstrably not.

So just do yourself and everyone a favor and don't generalize and presume to know what someone thinks about a subject as a point against something they said unless you know for certain that they haven't said the exact opposite of what you imply. Otherwise you force a reply that shouldn't have had to be made in the first place, and is just a waste of time. 

Same thing goes for the "moving stats" comment. If you had considered for a moment that I said I wasn't interested in the subject and put a question mark at the end of the 5-6 
sentence, you should have considered asking where I got that figure from before making inaccurate accusations. 

But let's take her 6-10 generations into perspective

1. That means that she had a relative be Cherokee between 180-300 years ago.

2. That means her % lineage is like 0.09-1.5% Cherokee

3. The average European American was found to be 0.18% Native American during some extensive study, so she is basically identical to the average white person in America

4. The DNA test used Mexican, Peruvian and Columbian DNA to test her. It did not use Native American DNA, or Cherokee DNA, which she claims she is, so it makes her proof even more laughable.

5. The Cherokee have come out and vehemently bashed this result and all it stands for

6. Trump wasn't the one who sent in 'family recipe's' claiming to be Cherokee. Saying her Dad's family nearly didn't let him marry her mom due to them being discriminatory towards Cherokee's. Trump didn't put on her resume's that she was Cherokee. Trump didn't brag that she was the first women of color professor at Harvard. That was all her. All he did was call her Pocahontas and as many do when fighting Trump, she has dug her hole further trying to fight back.

Like I said earlier, I don't find this interesting. (The only thing I'm interested in is seeing whether people I interact with care about this or not.)
But since you made the effort to post this, I read it.

I still don't really have anything to add about any of it, e
xcept the parts that sound like unsubstantiated claims. No matter what the subject, that shouldn't be a thing.
I read some comments earlier that suggest as much, so I'd like to ask, which resume did she put Cherokee on? And when did she brag about being the first woman of color professor at Harvard?
I tried to find what you're referring to, and according to factcheck.org, her heritage did not come up when she applied to Harvard according Charles Fried, who was on the appointments committee that recommended hiring Warren in 1995.
https://www.factcheck.org/2017/12/elizabeth-warrens-pocahontas-controversy/

Regarding "The average European American was found to be 0.18% Native American", the average just means an average out of a group of people. Between a 100% white person and a 100% native american, the average is 0.5. What does that say about the 100% white person? Nothing. He has no native american ancestry whatsoever, in spit of the 0.5 average figure applied to him.

Referring to them both as having an average of 0.5 would be misleading. The question is if someone has native american lineage.
In Warren's case, she does.

Also, regarding the math, sundin13's post above breaks it down.
"If you assume that all of Warrens other ancestors had an average amount of Native American DNA and one Native American ancestor 6-10 generations ago with 95% Native American DNA, she would have 0.27-1.66% Native American DNA which is 150-922% more Native American DNA than other white Americans. This is making several assumptions, but the original paper makes it clear that this is strong evidence of an unadmixed Native American ancestor within 10 generations. Take from that what you will."

Last edited by Hiku - on 18 October 2018