Especially when one's DNA suggests that is indeed the case and at the sort of levels one had been claiming.
Elizabeth Warren Ancestry Thread
- Thread starter Trebuchet
- Start date
- Status
Especially when one's DNA suggests that is indeed the case and at the sort of levels one had been claiming.
Belz...
Fiend God
He never will, because he knows it isn't. He's playing a game as usual.
The Big Dog
Unregistered
- Joined
- Jul 26, 2007
- Messages
- 29,742
Sorry, Elizabeth Warren does not hypothetically get credit for hypothetically apologizing, indeed she has refused to do so.
But to answer your question, hypothetically, no.
Okay. What should happen then? You said apologizing would be the first step, but obviously it wouldn't be enough. What happens next?
What about the fact that she never claimed any closer than 6-generations ancestry and the DNA is consistent with that?
Drewbot
Philosopher
- Joined
- Sep 13, 2007
- Messages
- 7,719
That's simply a compilation of sources, and quotes.
The Bernstein quote is in that article, as well as the Freid quote.
The original Boston Globe articles that contain those quotes are archived behind an archive wall, so the Breitbart link was necessary.
Believe me, I would have posted the MSM links if I could, because I knew you would see Breitbart and dismiss it out of hand. But it is not an opinion piece, simply a compilation of hte quotes I was looking for.
Unless something has changed in the last ten pages, which I seriously doubt, I think he is referring to the articles by tribal members who don't like people who are not tribal members claiming that they have Native American ancestors. It is distinction that doesn't matter much to them. You are either in a tribe or you are not.
It is an understandable position and I actually think that it has a solid basis and may be one reason why Warren no longer claims to be Native American.
But the argument misses the fact that she never claimed to be a tribal member, only that her family was known to have Native American Ancestry and that her parents had to deal with that.
As an aside: I would love to see the questionnaire she filled out in its entirety. In the mid to late 90's every firm I worked for sent around poorly worded questionnaires trying to find out what their employee composition looked like, other than "mainly white". Most were very vague about how to answer. Check more than one box if applicable, check no boxes if appropriate, that sort of thing. I checked the white box four times.
The real minefield, though, was the sexual orientation section that appeared to be written by a frightened church woman who wasn't willing to look up the meaning of any of the terms. The way it was worded left plenty of room for a happily married straight guy, like me, to answer "bi-sexual, married" without much worry. I didn't, but I remember the question being very open to misuse.
The Big Dog
Unregistered
- Joined
- Jul 26, 2007
- Messages
- 29,742
Lets wait until she does it, and given her stance thus far, it seems likely that day will ever come.
Do you agree she should apologize? Yes __ No___
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
Yes, I see a problem with this. The problem is that you don't have any EVIDENCE that these dots are connected....correlation does not imply causation. In order for it to do so, EVIDENCE is required or the correlation means nothing.
Further, there is an even bigger problem. Not only do you not have any EVIDENCE to support your claim of causation, there is in fact actual, real evidence that the causation does not exist. It comes from the actual people involved in her hiring at Harvard. They say there was NO correlation.
You claim is irrefutably debunked, although I don't expect that will prevent you, or any other Trumpophants from continuing to lie about it.
Belz...
Fiend God
So your suggestion that she apologise is pointless and dishonest. Got it.
Belz...
Fiend God
Still not racist, though.
Well this is just you admitting you don't really give a crap, you just to keep Warren on the hook forever. This is "No I'm never going to forgive Warren because what she did has nothing to do with anything, I just hate her."
I want to the record to state I asked honest questions with no ulterior motive and followed you as far as you were willing to honestly go with it.
The Big Dog
Unregistered
- Joined
- Jul 26, 2007
- Messages
- 29,742
o'rly?
"You can’t marry her because she’s part Cherokee and she’s part Delaware. And um, after fighting it as long as they could, my parents went off, they eloped."
E. Warren
Damn you - of course it is racist because um well it's obvious, do I need to spell it out to you?
Drewbot
Philosopher
- Joined
- Sep 13, 2007
- Messages
- 7,719
What if we just look at #1 ?
1. Puts self in minority directory.
Is that claim debunked?
2. and 3. won't be debunked until the employment records at Harvard are subpeonaed.
Belz...
Fiend God
It's incredible how selective morals turn out to be, for some.
Belz...
Fiend God
It's an easy game: Attack Trump's enemies, never defend Trump or his allies.
TBD rarely ever defends Trump, or anyone else for that a matter. Stick with just going after the enemies, any attempt to point out that Trump and others in his inner circle are even worse than any of Trump's enemies is just whataboutism. It does not matter what Trump does, because TBD will not defend that, or address it in any way, other than by going after those who report it or who support conclusions based upon those actions.
The best defense is a good offense.
- Status