Elizabeth Warren Ancestry Thread

[newyorkguy]

...This, and several other articles have been quoted in this thread, a thread you have been active in.

Why do you lie?

It looks to me like what is happening to Elizabeth Warren is what happened to Hillary Clinton. People in opposition to her -- and I would argue that opposition is more cultural/social than political -- have seized on the Native American issue to galvanize opposition to Warren. This issue plays perfectly into their biases. Whether it is really true or not doesn't matter, they are not going to let it go.

 

[kookbreaker]

It looks to me like what is happening to Elizabeth Warren is what happened to Hillary Clinton. People in opposition to her -- and I would argue that opposition is more cultural/social than political -- have seized on the Native American issue to galvanize opposition to Warren. This issue plays perfectly into their biases. Whether it is really true or not doesn't matter, they are not going to let it go.

Yeah, its definitely in the 'repeat a lie enough and it becomes truth.' territory.

 

[Drewbot]

It's pretty simple.

Harvard was required to hire minority faculty.
Warren was listed in the AALS Minority Faculty appendix II
Shortly after, she was hired by Harvard.
She was not touted as a minority to the faculty about her minority status during the hiring process.
She was touted as a minority by administrators in articles that are in print.
After she was hired she did not put herself in the AALS Minority Faculty Appendix II anymore.

How does that timeline not indicate to you, that she was listing herself as minority in order to get hired?

Icing on the cake, is that once she was hired by Harvard, she felt no need to continue placing her name in the directory as a minority.

 

[kookbreaker]

It's pretty simple.

Its a lie.

 

[xjx388]

It's pretty simple.

Harvard was required to hire minority faculty.

Required? By who? No, I don't think you can say they were required. It's good for their public image, no doubt. Diversity in faculty may even be desirable. But it's not required.

Warren was listed in the AALS Minority Faculty appendix II
Shortly after, she was hired by Harvard.

But you cannot connect those dots without evidence. Those two things are true but there is no evidence that Harvard consulted that directory and there are categorical denials from the people involved in her hiring.

She was not touted as a minority to the faculty about her minority status during the hiring process.
She was touted as a minority by administrators in articles that are in print.

OK, but the only thing Warren did wrong there was tick a box. It's been widely acknowledged by most on here that she shouldn't have done that. Bad Warren! Now tell me why any of that is important?

After she was hired she did not put herself in the AALS Minority Faculty Appendix II anymore.

How does that timeline not indicate to you, that she was listing herself as minority in order to get hired?

Icing on the cake, is that once she was hired by Harvard, she felt no need to continue placing her name in the directory as a minority.

This is pure speculation on your part. There are alternatives you are not considering.

 

[Drewbot]

Puts self in minority directory
Gets hired and touted as a minority
Takes self out of minority directory.

Do you not see the problem with this?

We know Harvard was under pressure to hire minorities. We also know that the employment records are sealed.

My faculty advisor (and later co-counsel), Harvard Law Professor Charles Fried, who was then on Harvard’s appointments committee, “claims that Warren’s Native American ancestry never came up in the hiring process, and that he only became aware of it later.” His recollection must be faulty. Fried was practically under siege at the time, and was keenly conscious of Harvard’s need to diversify the faculty based on race and sex to appease not just left-wing students, faculty, and journalists, but also to avoid serious potential legal consequences from the Massachusetts Commission Against Discrimination (MCAD), the notoriously anti-employer civil-rights agency that has jurisdiction over discrimination claims against Massachusetts employers like Harvard University.

https://www.mindingthecampus.org/2012/05/01/why_harvard_law_took_elizabeth_warren/

 

[acbytesla]

I don't think it's been debunked.
Harvard was under pressure to hire minority professors.
Warren put her name in a minority directory, which was used to recruit minority candidates.
Harvard hired her and touted her minority status.
Warren stops claiming minority status but Harvard continues to tout it.

She falsely claimed Native American minority status in the directory, to get hired as a minority professor.



https://www.breitbart.com/politics/...-in-law-school-directories-beginning-in-1986/

This is rank speculation with absolutely nothing to support it. Typical of the creative writing they perform at Breitbart.

Not one of the premises are proven.

Harvard was under pressure to hire minority professors.

How were they under pressure? There is no evidence for this. It is merely an unproven assertion.

Warren put her name in a minority directory, which was used to recruit minority candidates.

Also, how do you know she put her name in this directory? Just because her name may have been listed does not mean she put it there.

Harvard hired her and touted her minority status.

Harvard touted her minority status? How did they "tout her"? You mean listing this?

Warren stops claiming minority status, but Harvard continues to tout it.

What? I still don't see Warren EVER claimed minority status or stopped claiming that she was part Native American. Simply checking a box that she is part Native American is hardly claiming minority status.

She falsely claimed Native American minority status in the directory, to get hired as a minority professor.

Again there is no proof that she falsely claimed to be Native American or that she claimed some minority status.

I see those forms all the time asking one's heritage. Out of curiosity what boxes would my best friend's adopted son check?

He has blond hair, pale skin and striking blue eyes. He looks the epitome of the Hitler's Aryan race. Yet three of his great grandparents are full blooded Native Americans. (actually a Native tribe in Canada) He also has an African American father. Should he check that he is Native American or African American and or Caucasian? Should he deny some of his heritage? Or should he check all the boxes that apply? Is that claiming minority status?

The point is I wouldn't want to deny part of my heritage and who I thought I was. This is the quandary. Elizabeth Warren believed and still believes the family lore about her background. Why should she deny that?

This thread is total bollocks. It is beyond ridiculous. The year is 2018, that was 1986. 32 years ago. Why does anyone care? And especially why is it that the Republicans and Conservative media care about Warren's heritage? Does it make Warren's work protecting consumers any less important?

Lets say for ***** and giggles, that 40 years ago Warren checked those boxes to get ahead.

Does checking those boxes 4 decades ago make her a dishonest human being?

And if you come to that conclusion, what does that say about you?

Are you so perfect that you have never exaggerated even once, twice maybe even three times?

And most of all, if this matters to you, what does it say about you possibly supporting a man who has demonstrably lied more than 5 THOUSAND TIMES in the last two years?

 

[Foolmewunz]

When we split this to Part II, could the mods oblige us with an extended title, just for old times' sake?

EW Ancestry Thread Part II, Elizabeth Warren is Done.

It's pretty obvious the intention, here. They're ginning up for 2020 and with the success of the multi-year smear campaign against Hillary, you have the hilarious prospect of TBD giving a rat's ass about what NA say about anything! Pearl-clutching at its finest.

 

[xjx388]

Puts self in minority directory
Gets hired and touted as a minority
Takes self out of minority directory.

Do you not see the problem with this?

Sure, there's a problem. The question is: How big of a problem? I say, "A dumb mistake she made some years ago, but irrelevant to today, 20+ years later."

 

[The Big Dog]

When we split this to Part II, could the mods oblige us with an extended title, just for old times' sake?

EW Ancestry Thread Part II, Elizabeth Warren is Done.

It's pretty obvious the intention, here. They're ginning up for 2020 and with the success of the multi-year smear campaign against Hillary, you have the hilarious prospect of TBD giving a rat's ass about what NA say about anything! Pearl-clutching at its finest.

anyone notice the major problem with this post (yeah, there are lots, but I said major) Lets drill down:

"you have the hilarious prospect of TBD giving a rat's ass about what NA say about anything!" fallacious, of course; false? Of course.

But the real problem is that we have copious, unrebutted evidence that the warren aficionados really don't give a rat's ass "about what NA say about" Warren's stupid and racist stunt. Hell i repeatedly linked to articles about why Warren's stunt was stupid and racist, but rather than address those articles, posters attack me, because of course they do.

 

[The Great Zaganza]

I hope Warren is willing to take the Benghazi / Server treatment for two years to shield the actual top contenders for the 2020 nomination.

 

[The Big Dog]

Sure, there's a problem. The question is: How big of a problem? I say, "A dumb mistake she made some years ago, but irrelevant to today, 20+ years later."

She literally put out that breathtakingly stupid video within the last week....

 

[phiwum]

It's pretty simple.

Harvard was required to hire minority faculty.
Warren was listed in the AALS Minority Faculty appendix II
Shortly after, she was hired by Harvard.
She was not touted as a minority to the faculty about her minority status during the hiring process.
She was touted as a minority by administrators in articles that are in print.
After she was hired she did not put herself in the AALS Minority Faculty Appendix II anymore.

How does that timeline not indicate to you, that she was listing herself as minority in order to get hired?

Icing on the cake, is that once she was hired by Harvard, she felt no need to continue placing her name in the directory as a minority.

Suppose this was her motivation.

It still does not follow that she was hired because of her listing. You are running with purely circumstantial evidence that you would dismiss if it were directed at a figure you like. You overstate your certainty.

 

[Upchurch]

DAR started as nativist anti immigrant organization. Defining themselves as real Americans in contrast to more recent arrivals such as the Irish.

Over time the organization has become far less bigoted, racist and intolerant.

Well, clearly, that'd be because there are no Daughters of the American Revolution anymore, right? I mean, that's easily 10 generations ago.

 

[kookbreaker]

We know Harvard was under pressure to hire minorities.

We know nothing of the sort. We also know the right-wing is lying through their teeth about this, and you happily repeat the lies.

https://www.mindingthecampus.org/2012/05/01/why_harvard_law_took_elizabeth_warren/

First Brietbart, now another Right-Wing think-tank mouthpiece. Spare us, OK?

 

[Belz...]

She literally put out that breathtakingly stupid video within the last week....

Ah, yes. Let's make a foss out of a 30+ year old nothingburger, and then when the target responds, pretend that since the response is recent, it's no longer irrelevant.

 

[The Big Dog]

From the article i just posted and that no Warren fans seemingly have bothered to read:

Warren has focused much of her defense on proving that she did not get hired or promoted at Harvard because of her claim to Native ancestry, calling many prominent law professors as witnesses. But her claim still allowed Harvard to pat itself on the back for diversity that it did not actually have, touting her as a woman of color. This makes it more difficult for actual Native women to succeed: if Harvard believes it has a Native American law professor, when it doesn’t, then it will not feel pressured to create an opportunity for an actual Native American law professor, even if Warren was hired solely because of her contributions to bankruptcy law scholarship.

A point made previously, of course, and destined to be ignored.

We know nothing of the sort. We also know the right-wing is lying through their teeth about this, and you happily repeat the lies.

First Brietbart, now another Right-Wing think-tank mouthpiece. Spare us, OK?

No one reads anymore

 

[acbytesla]

anyone notice the major problem with this post (yeah, there are lots, but I said major) Lets drill down:

"you have the hilarious prospect of TBD giving a rat's ass about what NA say about anything!" fallacious, of course; false? Of course.

But the real problem is that we have copious, unrebutted evidence that the warren aficionados really don't give a rat's ass "about what NA say about" Warren's stupid and racist stunt. Hell i repeatedly linked to articles about why Warren's stunt was stupid and racist, but rather than address those articles, posters attack me, because of course they do.

Sorry, you don't have any of that. You have right wing nut job articles that don't prove a damn thing. This is not copious evidence. The only thing you are right about is that we don't give a rat's ass.

And just because you call something a racist stunt doesn't make it so. Simply claiming that one has some native American heritage is neither 'racist' or a 'stunt'. Apparently, you don't know the definition of those words.

I'm not attacking you. I am simply saying that your posts are total lies. This has become the Republican modus operandi. Don't care about the facts, exaggerate smear and defame

All the while, never answering why Warren claiming some Native American ancestry is meaningful to you since you have no proof it's not true. You can say she's lying about it but you can claim the flying spaghetti monster, pink unicorns or Yahweh created the universe but you have the same evidence supporting those claims. Which is none.

Is it that you perceive Elizabeth Warren is dishonest that bothers you? And if that is the issue, where are your hundreds of posts condemning all Trump's lies?

This is the real problem. Unmitigated hypocrisy or any sense of proportionality.

In other words. Get ******* serious.

 

[The Big Dog]

Sorry, you don't have any of that. You have right wing nut job articles that don't prove a damn thing. ... Get ******* serious.

Kim Tall Bear and the Cherokee Nation (among others)?

Warren's supporters reject them as:

"Right wing nut job articles>'

My favorite part? The person who declared Kim Tall Bear and the Cherokee Nation right wing nutjobs (clearly without reading the articles) tells me to

Get ******* Serious.

gaze upon what passes for skepticism from Warren's racism supporters.

 

[JoeMorgue]

Big Dog no one but you gives a crap about another "FreedomEagle.rus says the Democrats Invented Aids and Hawaiian Pizza!" conspiracy article.