Elizabeth Warren Ancestry Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
Meadmaker said:
Are there Native Americans who actually believe that? I mean, maybe a few very old people, perhaps, and one or two wackos, but really, is literalism a thing when it comes to Indian creation myths?
Click to expand...



I don’t think so. I think what the Cherokee leader is trying to say is that membership of their tribe is not a question of DNA, it’s a question of culture more than anything else. Better said. It’s a question of who the tribe decides to recognize based on whatever criteria they decide to use. Think of how many Americans can make the same kind of claim. Do all those get to open casinos, get lucrative government contracts, declare tribal autonomy, etc? No. The recognized tribes have an interest in keeping membership small.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Meadmaker said:
Are there Native Americans who actually believe that? I mean, maybe a few very old people, perhaps, and one or two wackos, but really, is literalism a thing when it comes to Indian creation myths?
Click to expand...


There's certainly no shortage of white people who hold similar beliefs about the Bible. Southern Baptists are the second largest denomination of Christians in the U.S.

I don't see why Native Americans should be dramatically less skeptical about their own faiths.
 
smartcooky said:
Yeah but.. to Trump sycophants like TDB and River etc, ANYTHING Trump does, no matter how rude or racist or inappropriate, is just fine and dandy, while anything that an opponent of Trump does, no matter what it is, is met with flurries of whaddaboutdatLib.
Click to expand...


"Elizabeth Warren is being hammered, even by the Left. Her false claim of Indian heritage is only selling to VERY LOW I.Q. individuals!"

-- President Donald J. Trump (Oct 16, 2018)
 
Trump Tweets

"Elizabeth Warren is being hammered, even by the Left. Her false claim of Indian heritage is only selling to VERY LOW I.Q. individuals!"
 
Is it just me, or is CNN somehow driving a narrative dismissing Elisabeth Warren for some reason?

I'm really stunned. As little as this whole thing matters, the bad guy in the court of public opinion after her stunt should be Trump and not her, as it seems that the test validates what she has claimed.

I mean, did CNN go after Obama after presenting his umpteenth birth certificate for some incomprehensible reason? Or is it something they don't like about Elisabeth Warren, pretty much like most corporate Democrats?
 
Tommok said:
Is it just me, or is CNN somehow driving a narrative dismissing Elisabeth Warren for some reason?
Click to expand...

CNN sucks. They try to be "balanced" at all costs, which means they tell "both sides" of an issue, even though one side is clearly wrong.
 
Giordano said:
I unfortunately tend to agree with you in that she was silly to lower herself to trying to engage with Trump at his level.
Click to expand...

Yep, she forgot the old adage didn't she...

"Never argue with an idiot. They will bring you down to their level of stupid, and beat you with experience"
 
Stacyhs said:
I thought my great grandparents were German. They were born in Germany, spoke German and were German citizens. Not even my grandmother, their daughter, knew otherwise so I always thought I was part German. It turned out they were actually of Danish descent and were only "Germans" because Prussia took Schleswig-Holstein from Denmark just before they were born.
Click to expand...


In view of Europe's history I'm not sure that a DNA test could reliably separate German ancestry from Danish.
 
wareyin said:
No, I'm sorry, but the "one side" making false claims are Republicans. Or do you somehow imagine that the Liberal Party of Canada has weighed in on this with their own lies?
Click to expand...

You're doubling down now. We're not talking about political parties.

Still incorrect, as there has been no evidence that she is wrong.
Click to expand...

Peruvian is not Cherokee.

D: And wrong again, as shown by the Politifact and Boston Globe links.
Click to expand...

Brownie points doesn't mean getting employment. It can be something as mundane as sympathy.
 
River said:
Oh you mean where she listed herself as Cherokee on the recipe? Did someone misquote her?
Click to expand...


I don't think it's established that anyone quoted her at all.

That isn't how little local cookbooks worked. Whoever compiled the recipes might have done it without any direct input from her.

Or do you mean she wasn't referring to her heritage? (which dems claimed victory on) Aren't the recipes (3 out of 5 were plagiarized?) supposed to represent NA recipes correct? Are you suggesting the label Cherokee was not referring to her ancestry as she has indicated previously when speaking about a relative getting married, or not? Just a label describing the lineage of those plagiarized (3 out of the 5) recipes, not inferring any sort of lineage to herself? Just want to be clear on your position. :D
Click to expand...

wareyin said:
My mother in law passed several church cookbooks down to my family. Would you believe that despite them being labeled as Methodist Church cookbooks, the recipes aren't actually Methodist? I've noticed a few were directly copied from Pillsbury, as well!
Click to expand...


This is more along the lines of how they were done.

It's a piece of history which many men might be completely oblivious to. It was common to the point of ubiquity for local women's groups to put out compilations of recipes from other members of their social groups. Church groups, garden clubs, sewing circles, reading clubs, etc., etc.. Their intended audience was rarely major publication, but more for other members of the groups. Recipes could be sourced from anywhere ... from recipes 'handed down for generations' to 'that chicken dish you made last month for the potluck', and just as easily been born originally in Joy of Cooking or from the family's live-in cook 'who's been with us for years'.

Historians love these little gems. Not merely for the picture they paint of the evolution of local cuisines but also for comments which give insights to the beliefs and attitudes of the times they were written in. It is a practice which goes back hundreds of years. There are probably thousands of such efforts, and I expect they are still being made, albeit with less frequency.

They aren't to be viewed as authoritative anything, even by the people who compiled them or the people who received them. Just little snapshots of local life.
 
xjx388 said:
I don’t think so. I think what the Cherokee leader is trying to say is that membership of their tribe is not a question of DNA, it’s a question of culture more than anything else.
Click to expand...


Certainly.


SmartCooky was the one who introduced the connection to creation myths into the conversation, saying that was among the reasons Native Americans didn't like DNA testing. I was questioning that. It seemed to me highly unlikely that there were very many Native American literalists.


(Except of course some who had adopted Christianity, and figured that their own cultures and genes could not be any older than Noah.)
 
quadraginta said:
There are probably thousands of such efforts, and I expect they are still being made, albeit with less frequency.
Click to expand...


I've contributed to one such effort at the local Temple. Other than being acceptably kosher, there was nothing Jewish about the recipes I contributed.
 
thaiboxerken said:
Nonsense. People calling Trump out are not exclusively Trump haters and hard-core Democrats. They are people that think words have meanings. Trump made a bet and people are just bringing attention to that fact and the fact that he is dishonest.

You think you're a "middle of the road" independent but you are not the public, you don't represent the public, and I doubt most people feel the way you do.
Click to expand...

It's hard to say how it really plays among the public, because most of the public aren't political junkies and aren't really paying attention. If they hear anything about this at all, it might be a couple of sentences of a summary, or something about Trump's tweets.

I suspect, though, among those who don't pay close attention, the reaction will be along the lines of, "What? That white girl said she was an Indian?"
 
There's something that I genuinely don't understand when it comes to this story. An awful lot of people here, and some outside of here, have said that Donald Trump ought to keep his word and pay out the million to charity because Warren's test proved she was telling the truth. Warren herself named a charity where he could send the check.

I don't get it.

The clip I heard several times on the radio yesterday where Trump introduced the million dollar offer had him saying that he would pay a million bucks to charity if she took a DNA test that proved she was an Indian.

Does anyone think this test proved she was an Indian? Don't substitute any other words in there. Does it prove she is an Indian?

Also, don't go down the road of "Well, Indians aren't defined by DNA...." or "Well, there's no official percentage of ancestry needed....." If any variation of those were true, then no DNA test could ever prove anyone was an Indian, so the bet would be moot right from the moment it was uttered. (Which of course it was for other reasons, but that's not the point.) And also, don't go down the, "She never said...." route, because the "bet" was based on his words, not hers. He said if the test proved she was an Indian.

So, for anyone who thinks he is welching on his bet, does this test prove she is an Indian?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom