Elizabeth Warren Ancestry Thread Part 2

kellyb said:
See, I've yet to encounter even one single person who says they won't vote for Warren in the general because of this issue.
Not one.
Just a lot of people predicting that maybe other people won't.
Click to expand...

She is untouchable to many prominent Native American activists over this kerfuffle. Their number might not matter much in the primaries, but their opinion influences a lot of progressives trying to outdo each other in the Woke Olympics. Might that matter? I don't know.

Your point stands though: As I shared in the previous thread, most Native American students I've discussed this with aren't even aware of this issue and they couldn't care less when I explain it.

Should Warren get the nomination and face Trump* in the general I would have ZERO concern about her ability to handle his bloviating nonsense. Clinton was in a box, squelching nearly every impulse to tell that creep where he could stick it. Warren 1) more naturally wears her emotion on her sleeve and 2) saw how far Clinton got playing/feigning nice with Trump.

*This assumes he lives that long or is not otherwise in an Adderral-induced coma by then.
 
Hellbound said:
TragicMonkey said:
You encounter dropdowns like that because of a universal programming rule: any field you allow the user to free text input will let a constant stream of garbage data into your database.
Click to expand...

Unless you do good error checking and have murder-drones pre-programmed to seek out and remove problematic users.
Click to expand...


Of course, Randall Munroe has an xkcd for every occasion.

This exchange reminded me of one of my favorites.

exploits_of_a_mom.png
 
The Shrike said:
She is untouchable to many prominent Native American activists over this kerfuffle. Their number might not matter much in the primaries, but their opinion influences a lot of progressives trying to outdo each other in the Woke Olympics. Might that matter? I don't know.

Your point stands though: As I shared in the previous thread, most Native American students I've discussed this with aren't even aware of this issue and they couldn't care less when I explain it.

Should Warren get the nomination and face Trump* in the general I would have ZERO concern about her ability to handle his bloviating nonsense. Clinton was in a box, squelching nearly every impulse to tell that creep where he could stick it. Warren 1) more naturally wears her emotion on her sleeve and 2) saw how far Clinton got playing/feigning nice with Trump.

*This assumes he lives that long or is not otherwise in an Adderral-induced coma by then.
Click to expand...


It's not certain that anyone would be able to tell the difference.
 
The Shrike said:
She is untouchable to many prominent Native American activists over this kerfuffle. Their number might not matter much in the primaries, but their opinion influences a lot of progressives trying to outdo each other in the Woke Olympics. Might that matter? I don't know.

Your point stands though: As I shared in the previous thread, most Native American students I've discussed this with aren't even aware of this issue and they couldn't care less when I explain it.

Should Warren get the nomination and face Trump* in the general I would have ZERO concern about her ability to handle his bloviating nonsense. Clinton was in a box, squelching nearly every impulse to tell that creep where he could stick it. Warren 1) more naturally wears her emotion on her sleeve and 2) saw how far Clinton got playing/feigning nice with Trump.

*This assumes he lives that long or is not otherwise in an Adderral-induced coma by then.
Click to expand...

Stop playing with me! It's cruel.:D
 
varwoche said:
I don't fault her for that aspect. The problem is, even per the family story, she was fractional. Self-identifying based on a small fraction is dishonest.
Click to expand...

What percentage of Irish ancestry is required to wear green on St. Patrick’s Day?
 
Scenario 1: Specify your race as "American Indian" on a form when you know it's just a small fraction of your background.

Scenario 2: Wear green on St Patrick's Day when you aren't Irish.

Guffaw! This absurd comparison doesn't merit a rebuttal.

The lengths people will go to avoid an obvious fact is something to behold.
 
Last edited:
varwoche said:
I don't fault her for that aspect. The problem is, even per the family story, she was fractional. Self-identifying based on a small fraction is dishonest.
Click to expand...

Yet we have people in this country who claim Maori tribal ancestral heritage with as little as 1/32nd. Keeping it simple, this means that if such a person had only ONE full Maori ancestor five generations back (A great, great, great grandparent), they would be claiming to be Maori. Is this dishonest? No, it isn't because it has been officially defined.

Before 1974, a Maori was defined as someone who was half-caste or more. The Maori Affairs Amendment Act 1974 redefined a Maori as "a person of the Maori race of New Zealand; and includes any descendant of such a Maori".

So the question I ask, is, has it ever been officially defined in the USA what it takes for a person to be considered "Native American". If it hasn't, then there are no ground rules, and ANY Native American ancestry would count.

IMO, Warren is guilty of only one thing - believing a family story. Its something I can relate to because we have a family story handed down to us by my father, a story that I have believed all my life - that we have Scottish heritage and are descended from the MacDonalds of the Highlands, in particular, Clan Donald, and that we are descendent of survivors of the Glencoe Massacres in 1692.

Turns out it was all BS. Both my sister and I have had DNA testing - we have ZERO Scottish ancestry - not even any Celtic ancestry of any kind. Our ancestry is through Europe - English and French mostly.

Don't believe everything you parents tell you about your family hostory
 
smartcooky said:
Yet we have people in this country who claim Maori tribal ancestral heritage with as little as 1/32nd. Keeping it simple, this means that if such a person had only ONE full Maori ancestor five generations back (A great, great, great grandparent), they would be claiming to be Maori. Is this dishonest? No, it isn't because it has been officially defined.
Click to expand...
I would need to know the specifics of the scenario. It sounds dubious.

You're on the verge of conflating tribal affiliation with ethnic background which confuses things.
 
Last edited:
smartcooky said:
Yet we have people in this country who claim Maori tribal ancestral heritage with as little as 1/32nd.
Click to expand...

At least 29 tribes in the US have no minimum blood quantum requirement for membership. They instead emphasize verified lineal descent, with some Cherokee leaning heavily on the Dawes Rolls for that starting point.

Non-native folks living outside the former Indian Territory that is now the state of Oklahoma are generally naive to how much "Native blood" is actually out there among ostensibly white (and black!) people in Oklahoma. Blonde hair and blue eyes are by no means an indication that a person you meet in Oklahoma is not to some degree Native American.

  1. Some of these people have traced their ancestry, gotten documentation, and pursued official tribal affiliation.
  2. Some have traced their ancestry but didn't have the documentation and have not pursued tribal affiliation even if they might self-identify as Native American in part.
  3. Others think they have that ancestry but they actually don't.

Warren is in that second category, and there are thousands of people in there with her.
 
The Shrike said:
ABlonde hair and blue eyes are by no means an indication that a person you meet in Oklahoma is not to some degree Native American.
Click to expand...

I used to work with a member of of the Cherokee tribe. She had blue eyes, pale skin and white-blonde hair (and that strong, strong Okie accent). Yet, she had the ancestry and was a tribal member.

I admit, that influences my perception of the Warren ancestry issue. A person can have very little native ancestry, but still be a member of a tribe, still be culturally and legally an American Indian.
 
varwoche said:
The misrepresentations happened so long ago that you're probably right. Still, it's an indicator of a weak personality, and her present day handling of the topic hasn't helped.



Whoever faces Trump needs to be able to look into the eye of the beast without blinking. Think Frodo and Sauron.
Click to expand...

Frodo blinked, though.
 
The Shrike said:
Non-native folks living outside the former Indian Territory that is now the state of Oklahoma are generally naive to how much "Native blood" is actually out there among ostensibly white (and black!) people in Oklahoma. Blonde hair and blue eyes are by no means an indication that a person you meet in Oklahoma is not to some degree Native American.
  1. Some of these people have traced their ancestry, gotten documentation, and pursued official tribal affiliation.
  2. Some have traced their ancestry but didn't have the documentation and have not pursued tribal affiliation even if they might self-identify as Native American in part.
  3. Others think they have that ancestry but they actually don't.

Warren is in that second category, and there are thousands of people in there with her.
Click to expand...

Thank you, yes. I'm in the second category myself—with just over 5% Taíno ancestry—but my wife and kids (whose well-documented Delaware ancestors hail from NE Oklahoma) are all in the first category despite having blue eyes and an even lower "blood quantum" than I do.

A while back, my wife and a friend from down the street made the drive from OKC to Bartlesville to fill out tribal forms and be regaled with oral histories from the sort of folk who keep those stories alive. I mention this just to point out how commonplace tribal membership is around here, and how it is more a matter of voluntary civic involvement than anything else. If you're thinking of "full-blood" native folks growing up on reservations, you are probably thinking of one of the four corners states out west rather than the former Indian Territory.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom