Elizabeth Warren Ancestry Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
CORed said:
I have similar family stories about a Native American ancestor. Since I never got any more detail about which ancestor, what tribe, or any other such information, I don't take it too seriously, and I have never represented myself as Native American. For that matter, I don't really see much point in ethnic identity anyway. My inclination when asked my race is to say "human" or "none of your business". Aside from stories of a Native American ancestor, my ancestry is, as far as I know all European, and my appearance is certainly consistent with that (brown hair, blue eyes, fair skin).

I would tend to agree with you that it was somewhat foolish of Elizabeth Warren to set so much store in some nebulous family stories, but I would say that it is a pretty minor bit of foolishness, and by no means a deal breaker were she to be a candidate for some office for which I would be voting, and it pales to insignificance relative to the foolishness of Republicans in trying to score political points from it, or imply, in the complete absence of credible evidence, that she somehow gained an unfair advantage by doing so. If anything, my reaction to that is, as with many lame political smears is, "Is that really the worst thing you could find about her? If so, she must be pretty good."
Click to expand...


Not minor. Political office requires integrity and probity of character.
 
Vixen said:
It's positive discrimination. It gave Harvard the opportunity to brag it's fulfilled its quota of ethnics, so doesn't need to take on any more.

So the real ethnic has lost out to an unscrupulous cheat.
Click to expand...

Evidence that Harvard had any such "quota" to fulfill? Good luck. No "quota" existed.

It has been stated repeatedly that no one on the hiring committee was aware of Warren having any N A blood.

In the most exhaustive review undertaken of Elizabeth Warren’s professional history, the Globe found clear evidence, in documents and interviews, that her claim to Native American ethnicity was never considered by the Harvard Law faculty, which voted resoundingly to hire her, or by those who hired her to four prior positions at other law schools. At every step of her remarkable rise in the legal profession, the people responsible for hiring her saw her as a white woman.
The Globe examined hundreds of documents, many of them never before available, and reached out to all 52 of the law professors who are still living and were eligible to be in [on the decision]. Some are Warren’s allies. Others are not. Thirty-one agreed to talk to the Globe — including the law professor who was, at the time, in charge of recruiting minority faculty. Most said they were unaware of her claims to Native American heritage and all but one of the 31 said those claims were not discussed as part of her hire. One professor told the Globe he is unsure whether her heritage came up, but is certain that, if it did, it had no bearing on his vote on Warren’s appointment.
Click to expand...
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/elizabeth-warren-wealthy-native-american/
 
Giordano said:
Why slimy??

How did you learn of your own ethnic heritage? From your family, right? Was it only Great Uncle Ernie? Or weren't there memes that circulated among many family members, including your immediate family? Dad at a pizza parlor, "Oh, did you know - there's some Italian background in our family on your mother's side. One of her grandparents, or something like that, came into New York in steerage from Florence." You ask your Mom. "Oh, it was my great grandfather alright. I never met him before he died. But my mom told me he was from Italy. Although I think it was Naples." Next family get together Uncle Sal starts talking about how your family has Polish roots. So you ask him about this Italian background. He says, "Yep! I don't quite remember how, but sure. Somewhere in there. Probably why you love garlic, ha, ha." Etc...

That's how it worked in my family. Yours? How else could I have learned any of this stuff? Did I demand documents? Did you? I checked (and check) the Caucasian box on the forms because that is what these family stories told me I was. Assuming you checked an ethnicity box at some point, how did you choose? There were no DNA tests for most of the time I (and I presume you) was checking these boxes. Family memes. I haven't felt the need to run any DNA tests on me now before I fill out the next form. In fact these boxes are for the ethnicity with which one identifies. They do not require physical proof (before very recent DNA testing none was available) and there is no genetic minimum that qualifies one.

These exact same considerations apply to Senator Warren. She learned of her Native American ancestry through the exactly same type of family memes we all learn of our own ancestry. At a time when there were no DNA tests, and family stories were the only way to learn of such things. And although family stories are usually a bit vague and differ a little from teller to teller they all indicated there was some Native American ancestry in her. And she was proud of that enough to tell that part of her story to others from time to time when the issue of ethnicity came up. Just as I would. I check the Caucasian box on most forms, but if a waiter at a Jewish deli asks me, "Hey where did you learn to like gefilte fish?" I would tell him the other ethnic truth about me, I am Jewish too. And most significant of all, now, with DNA testing available to her Warren's family stories have been confirmed as true. In contrast, my Caucasian/Jewish family stories have never been confirmed by DNA testing although I still accept them. Yours?

"Taking away a true Native American's position" from that directory? Was there a limit on the total number of listings? Warren had and has every reason to identify as having Native American heritage (she does). In contexts where her Native American heritage was not relevant she indicated what she always maintained was the majority of her heritage, Caucasian (based on her family stories of course). But when the issue was relevant, a directory of Native American attorneys, she said, hey, that includes me, and was listed. Notably clients are comforted by being able to connect to their attorneys, and Warren's correct identification as having Native American ancestry was something she could offer as a re-assurence and a comfort to potential clients who are traditionally underserved by the legal profession. You see it as her illegitimately lying to attract more clients. I see it as her reaching out to a under-represented group using her own family story (a true one). In fact I doubt that Native Americans are a large enough, wealthy enough population to be a much of a target for a greedy lawyer.
Click to expand...


Aw, bless, Giordano. Are you really that trusting? Lend me $100K until, er, next week and I'll pay you back Wednesday. Honest, guv!

And what about $5 to bless the baby's head?
 
Stacyhs said:
My DNA test came back with specifically Scandinavian heritage. When researching the genealogical documents it was backed up when I discovered my gr grandmother's maiden name was "Jensen" which is Danish and my grandfather's surname, which is very unusual, overwhelmingly was found in Denmark and Schleswig-Holstein which was Danish before being ceded to Germany by war. So, yes, it did distinguish it correctly as being Scandinavian.
Click to expand...

A Dane...<fx garlic and crucifix>
 
Vixen said:
Not minor. Political office requires integrity and probity of character.
Click to expand...

Warren claimed she had N A lineage. DNA backs her up.

Warren did not bring this up; her opponent in 2012 tried to smear her character with it. Trump tried the same thing.

Warren did not get where she is by anything other than her own hard work and intelligence. Pity some people would rather resort to character assassination over such a trivial thing as a cookbook and believing what your own family has told you growing up.
 
Vixen, are you going to provide evidence of your claims that 1) Harvard had a "quote" for diversity and 2) Warren's parents did not elope?

If history is anything to go on, the answer is 'no'.
 
It's amazing how Warren's claim that she has NA lineage and then proving it with a DNA test is somehow being "well and truly snookered" by Trump.
 
Vixen said:
Today's DNA testing can pinpoint exactly which 'tribe' you are from.
I used to be sceptical of DNA tests, which is why I never had one until I was urged to so that someone could get a 'recommend a friend' cashback.

I was impressed that it managed to pinpoint my DNA precisely. Wow. If it can do that for remote regions in a Eurasian continent crowded with 721 million people of hundreds of ethnicities, I feel sure it can differentiate NA tribes, who are likely to be relatively homogenous amongst themselves.

Irish guy on tele was accurately pinpointed to where he came from in Norn Iron.
Click to expand...

No, not in the way you are proposing. If you suspect that you have relatively close kin who are already accepted members of a tribe then DNA testing can document that you are indeed a near relative to them and therefore, depending on the rules of the tribe, may also be eligible for tribal membership (and membership is not typically awarded only on a genetic relationship). DNA testing is sufficient to establish a link (or not) to a specific person or persons already identified in the tribe if they are close enough kin. It does not have sufficient resolution to determine the more distance relationships involved in determining if an individual with a more distant genetic link (say going back multiple generations) matches generically to a particular tribe as a group. This aspect has been repeatedly discussed upthread.

DNA testing services that claim otherwise are exaggerating and/or using additional information you have provided to them (cold or hot reading).

I do not know the Norn Iron example but if the guy was very recently from a very inbred small population that might be observable in DNA testing, but I doubt that a link could be detected beyond a few generations.
 
Stacyhs said:
Warren never claimed that her NA ancestor was recent, but only that the family had "Cherokee lineage".

I think we have to consider the time period that Warren is talking about regarding her father's family views on Indian blood. Warren's parents were born in 1911 and 1912 so his parents were Victorians. Attitudes about "white people" mixing with any minority race were very negative, including those having "savages' blood" as they would most likely have considered it. So his family not wanting their son to marry someone who was believed to have Indian blood would likely have been very normal at the time. Hell, in 1946 my own grandmother's second husband's family was incensed that she wasn't Italian and never let her forget it.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately for you, Warren also lied about her parents having to elope.
 
Vixen said:
Aw, bless, Giordano. Are you really that trusting? Lend me $100K until, er, next week and I'll pay you back Wednesday. Honest, guv!

And what about $5 to bless the baby's head?
Click to expand...

In fact I am not particularly trusting. I very much know that some people make up stuff all the time. The evidence is strongly that Warren is not one of them. But I am quite suspicious of some of the people on this very forum because they have a history of repeatedly presenting wild, undocumented claims in multiple thread that contradict well established facts.

Do you know that there is no such word as naive in the dictionary?
 
Stacyhs said:
That is not true. DNA tests cannot determine which tribe a person is related to.


http://www.councilforresponsiblegenetics.org/ViewPage.aspx?pageId=163



Evidence of this please.
Click to expand...

Yes, it can. It pinpointed me exactly.

See here:

One determined researcher, Cherokee genealogist Twila Barnes, did some background checking, and found some interesting tidbits that led her and her team to suggest that the marriage of Warren’s parents was a typical marriage from the era of the Great Depression, and not an elopement triggered by racial bias. First, the marriage was performed by a prominent minister who later helped found Southern Methodist University, not a justice of the peace.
Click to expand...


Justify that.
 
Stacyhs said:
Vixen, are you going to provide evidence of your claims that 1) Harvard had a "quote" for diversity and 2) Warren's parents did not elope?

If history is anything to go on, the answer is 'no'.
Click to expand...

It provides ethnicity figures:

Of the freshmen students admitted to Harvard this year, 50.8 percent are from minority groups, including African-Americans, Hispanics, Asian-Americans, Native Americans, and Native Hawaiians. That's up from 47.3 percent last year, according to the university.3 Aug 2017
Click to expand...
 
Vixen said:
Yes, it can. It pinpointed me exactly.

See here:




Justify that.
Click to expand...
I read your link.
Paying particular attention to the part where: "the day after they were married, Warrens' parents came back to town and announced it to everyone" a fait acompli.

Is there some definition of "eloping" that you use that does not include running off to another town without telling anyone, getting married, and then coming home already wed?
 
Vixen said:
Unfortunately for you, Warren also lied about her parents having to elope.
Click to expand...

Once again, provide evidence of this.

Oh, here...let me help you.

....the wedding announcement states the day after her parents were married they came back to town and announced it to everyone.
Click to expand...
(Dailywire)

Hmmmm...if they had this big traditional wedding, why would they have to announce it to everyone when they came back to town?

This whole load of crap is based on one Twila Barnes' "research". As evidence that Warren's parents did elope? The fact they were married by a Methodist minister and not a Justice of the Peace. Whoa, Nelly! That's some evidence!

I suggest you stop reading anti-Warren biased websites that, per usual, are twisting whatever they can to fit that bias.
 
Giordano said:
No, not in the way you are proposing. If you suspect that you have relatively close kin who are already accepted members of a tribe then DNA testing can document that you are indeed a near relative to them and therefore, depending on the rules of the tribe, may also be eligible for tribal membership (and membership is not typically awarded only on a genetic relationship). DNA testing is sufficient to establish a link (or not) to a specific person or persons already identified in the tribe if they are close enough kin. It does not have sufficient resolution to determine the more distance relationships involved in determining if an individual with a more distant genetic link (say going back multiple generations) matches generically to a particular tribe as a group. This aspect has been repeatedly discussed upthread.

DNA testing services that claim otherwise are exaggerating and/or using additional information you have provided to them (cold or hot reading).

I do not know the Norn Iron example but if the guy was very recently from a very inbred small population that might be observable in DNA testing, but I doubt that a link could be detected beyond a few generations.
Click to expand...

You missed my point about the history of law. The medieval ages emphasis on family and bloodlines is what predicates our legal system today (nationality, citizenship, kinship, right to inherit).

If you go to court wanting to claim inheritance rights, or sue someone for topping one of your relatives...you have to name that relative or you'll be laughed out of court.

Kimo sabe?
 
Vixen said:
Yes, it can. It pinpointed me exactly.

See here:




Justify that.
Click to expand...

What is there to justify? Your citation is composed entirely of undocumented heaps of innuendo and highly slanted "tidbits" that even if true do not invalidate Warren's story. The marriage was performed by a prominent minister? "Prominent" ministers don't do elopements I guess? The marriage happened very soon after the groom turned 21, the legal age for marriage at that time so it could not have been after a long family opposition? Just the opposite: he could have married much earlier if he had parental permission; the fact they waited until 21 very much supports the idea that the married in the face of family opposition. Wtc.

It is not worth continuing this discussion given the distorted nature of the "information" being presented in support of your claims. But I will continue to await more substantiative posts from you in the future and will gladly engage in more productive, truth-based discussion if one arises.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom