I really like Elizabeth Warren (1 Viewer)

[The_Man]

Elizabeth Warren is a fraud who won an election against a superior candidate because she ran in a state in which voters flocked to the polls and voted for a political party and not a person. Not that this board is any different with people so wanting to argue for their party, they lose sight of good people and politics.

Yeah and yet those same people voted for the allegedly superior candidate last time. So did they only just start voting for political parties this cycle or was it maybe that the superior candidate wasn't?

It wasn't actually the same people. The Coakley/Brown election was a special election, the Warren/Brown election was held on a Presidential election day. Lots of people vote in Presidential elections that don't vote in special Senate elections.

The more people that vote in our democratic elections, the better, right? So Warren was victorious when a larger number of our fellow citizens participated in democracy.

 

[NCCommish]

Elizabeth Warren is a fraud who won an election against a superior candidate because she ran in a state in which voters flocked to the polls and voted for a political party and not a person. Not that this board is any different with people so wanting to argue for their party, they lose sight of good people and politics.

Yeah and yet those same people voted for the allegedly superior candidate last time. So did they only just start voting for political parties this cycle or was it maybe that the superior candidate wasn't?

It wasn't actually the same people. The Coakley/Brown election was a special election, the Warren/Brown election was held on a Presidential election day. Lots of people vote in Presidential elections that don't vote in special Senate elections.

That is a valid point to consider I should have thought of it.

 

[wazoo11]

Elizabeth Warren is a fraud who won an election against a superior candidate because she ran in a state in which voters flocked to the polls and voted for a political party and not a person. Not that this board is any different with people so wanting to argue for their party, they lose sight of good people and politics.

I voted for Warren as a person and not the political party.(3rd party voter fyi)

 

[Mr. Pickles]

Thank you, Glenn Beck.

Speaking of this, has the other guy... Keith Olbermann ... completely disappeared from the face of the earth?

Hopefully.

 

[Sweet J]

More importantly, it calls into question the character of the person herself. What standing does Elizabeth Warren have to call out financial companies who take advantage of loopholes or even outright fraud to get ahead? She had no problem doing this sort of thing when she was starting out and found it convenient to do so.

You really think she made the whole thing up?

I'm going to have to back up IK here, for a couple of reasons:1) AA has a reason behind it, a philosophy. Two pronged, right? a) people who didn't have the same opportunities as you or me should be given a leg up to even the playing field, and b) the community as a whole benefits by having a diverse group among its members. I happen to believe in both of these goals, so I don't really have a problem with AA (I know there are other problems with AA, but this isn't really the thread for that).As for the above, claiming ancestry such that she does, does not further the spirit of AA as outlined above. If a priviledged white guy, raised as an upper-middle class white person, found out as an adult that his grandfather was not who he thought he was, but was actually a black/Indian (insert minority here) man, would it be "right" or "fair" for this person to claim minority status on a job or college application?2) "Family lore" within my family is that my twin sisters' paternal great-grandmother was cherokee. They had never met her, had never been to a reservation, never been imersed in the Native culture, and had never had the downside of being raised Indian. The only difficult thing that my sisters had to deal with growing up as lower-middle class white girls was having a crazy white mother, a dead father, and a bumbling older brother. Nothing worthy of claiming AA ancestry. Someone once asked my sister if she would claim Indian ancestry for college/job applications, and she said somethign along the lines of: "I don't even know if it's true; I haven't really looked into it; plus, I'd feel bad getting benefits while people eat dirt on a reservation."If my tweeked-out 25 year old sister knows the difference between right and wrong, I don't feel compelled to give Warren a pass, even though I like her political positions. But claiming Indian ancestry is not a "harmless" thing, and she absolutely should get pilloried for "taking her mother's word for it." Anybody who does a MODICUM of research knows that claiming Native American ancestry is more complicated than "one of my parents told me it was true." I'd be less bitter about it if she claimed black ancestry.

 

[Slapdash]

[Yeah I know the GOP turned that into brouhaha that was just another episode of trying to play gotcha with nothing. But I still have no idea what you are trying to say.

One of the primary criticisms of affirmative action is that it sometimes unfairly helps people without justification, at the expense of other people. If Elizabeth Warren got any preferences for being part Cherokee, that would be a pretty good example of this.

On Tuesday, Sen. Scott Brown (R-Mass.) went birther on Elizabeth Warren. "Serious questions have been raised about the legitimacy of Elizabeth Warren's claims to Native American ancestry," Brown said in a statement released to the press.

But given the available evidence concerning Warren's ancestry, Brown is essentially implying there may have been an elaborate, years-long effort to fake his opponent's heritage—not unlike the conspiracy envisioned by right-wing activists who sought "answers" about President Obama's citizenship. (The Brown campaign did not respond to multiple requests for comment.)

This faux controversy stems from a series of articles in the Boston Herald, which reported that Warren had listed herself as Native American in a Harvard Law School faculty directory. (Brown's top adviser, Eric Fehrnstrom, is a former Herald reporter.) This fueled criticism on the right that Warren had falsely claimed Native American status to advance her legal career. Now this bizarre kerfuffle has snowballed well beyond that, as conservatives pursue an in-depth probe of Warren's great-great-great grandmother's ethnicity and whether Warren's great-great-great-uncle lied about it.

What's known is this: As the Herald reported after publishing its initial story on Warren's background, researchers at the New England Historical Genealogical Society believe that one of Warren's great-great-great grandmothers, a woman named O.C. Sarah Smith, was Cherokee. If O.C. Sarah Smith was full-blooded, that would make Warren at least 1/32 Cherokee. (While that may seem insubstantial, Bill John Baker, the principal chief of the Cherokee nation, is also 1/32 Cherokee.) The NEHGS based its claim on a March 2006 newsletter referencing research by a woman named Lynda Smith. The newsletter reports that while digging into her own ancestry, Smith found a marriage application in which William J. Crawford, a son of O.C. Sarah Smith, listed his mother's race as Cherokee.

The NEHGS considers the newsletter to be a legitimate source, says Tom Champoux, a spokesman for the group. "Genealogists do reference research conducted by others, with further verification sometimes provided," he said in an emailed statement. "In the case of Native American research, it's not uncommon for families to pass down family histories orally, especially with earlier generations, as paper evidence and primary documents were not kept." But in this case there is a primary document cited—the marriage application.

Even this, however, has not been enough for Warren's critics. A day after publishing its story revealing the marriage application, the Herald published a follow-up implying the document may not actually exist. The article argued that genealogists had been "unable to back up earlier accounts" of Warren's ancestry because a copy of the marriage application has yet to be produced. Over at Breitbart.com, Michael Patrick Leahy, whose hobby is genealogy, has chimed in with a new wrinkle. Based on Census and other records, he argues that William J. Crawford either lied or was mistaken about his mother's race:

[W]hy would Ms. Warren's great-great-grand-uncle make up such a thing? Perhaps he showed the same kind of tendency towards ancestral "embellishment" that she herself seems to exhibit, or perhaps there was some logistical or tactical benefit in the Oklahoma Territory of 1894 to him and his intended bride that encouraged him to make the claim. Or perhaps he believed it to be true, even though in all probability it was not. We will likely never know.

(It's hard to imagine why a man wouldn't know his own mother's ethnicity. At a time when Native Americans were being herded onto reservations at gunpoint, it's unclear what conceivable benefit there would have been to falsely claiming Native American status. And even if William J. Crawford did lie for some reason, it's hard to see how Warren could have known about it.)

By jumping into this controversy, Brown seems to be embracing the same tortured, birther-esque arguments as the conservatives who are trying to paint Warren (and her great-great-great-uncle) as a liar. Perhaps the better question is why Brown is raising these "serious questions" to begin with.

Mother Jones

Seems like more birther crap to me. So it may be an example of something but a strike against affirmative action not so much.

This is riduclous.

 

[Sweet J]

Also, fatguy, regarding the "did she make it up" idea: There are lots of ways to charictarize whether a person "made something up" or "lied." Nobody can really know whether a person really lied about something, or just lied to themselves. It's really a continuum. Unless a person is a sociopath, the lies that a person tells (particularly the "big" ones) are often not really really full-out lies. They are a combination of willful blindness, a desire to believe in something, a preference for seeing your side of the story as more credible than another person's side, etc. etc. etc.

I'm sure she was told that she has a family member who is cherokee. I wouldn't be suprized if it was true. (As an aside - most of my co-workers are Native American. The joke is that every Joe off the street is part-cherokee. Whenever a Native person hears some white guy/girl mention that they are "part-cherokee" (and it happens all the time here), I see the same eye-roll among the Indians. Here in my department, if you aren't registered with a Tribe, you ain't Indian.).

Anyway, there is a big continuum between "honest mistake," "family lore," and "outright lie." Well within the continuum is "she should have known better." That's where I place her.

 

[Jewell]

What's the statute of limitations on claiming an ethnicity? 1/32 doesn't seem like much to me, but maybe it is a reasonable amount by current standards?

No, it isn't reasonable. I'm opposed to affirmative action, but if you're going to advocate for affirmative action and benefit from it (as Warren has on both counts) then she should honor the law's intent rather than a mere technicality of being 1/32nd Cherokee. Great, that means that she's likely 31/32nd Euro ancestry. She looks completely Euro. So, if she believes that affirmative action is needed because minorities are routinely discriminated against based on their physical appearance, she never suffered that discrimination because she looks white. She then took a position away from an affirmative action candidate who may have suffered discrimination based on their appearance.Her name sounds Euro. So, if she believes that affirmative action is needed because minorities are routinely discriminated against based on blind resumes based on their name sounding too ethnic, she never suffered that discrimination because her name doesn't sound ethnic. She then took a position away from an affirmative action candidate who may have suffered discrimination based on their ethnic sounding name.If she beieves that affirmative action is necessary to give back to a descendent who's ancestors were discriminated against, then a much smaller percentage of her ancestors were discriminated against than the typical person seeking redress va affirmative action. Thus, under the redress view of affirmative action she's taking a position from someone who had far more ancestors discriminated against and thus a stronger claim for redress.It's fine to identify for her to identify with that part of her ancestry, but it's kind of cheesy to use it as an extra career boost contrary to the intent of affirmative action which it appears she may have.

 

[Slapdash]

“You know, if you’re caught with an ounce of cocaine, the chances are good you’re going to go to jail,” Warren said. “If it happens repeatedly, you may go to jail for the rest of your life. But evidently, if you launder nearly a billion dollars for drug cartels and violate our international sanctions, your company pays a fine and you go home and sleep in your own bed at night, every single individual associated with this. I think that’s fundamentally wrong.”

If a banker or businessman knew that they were engaged in illegal activity (including violating international sanctions), or reasonably should have known that they were engaged in illegal activity given the circumstances, I agree with Warren.

Hey Jewell, check out this article if you want to know more about the real issue here: Gangster Bankers: Too Big to Jail

 

[timschochet]

She seems very like able. Every time I hear her interviewed she sounds forthright, intelligent, and down to earth. She's a little to progressive for me I think, but I can't help but like her.

 

[Ramsay Hunt Experience]

What's the statute of limitations on claiming an ethnicity? 1/32 doesn't seem like much to me, but maybe it is a reasonable amount by current standards?

No, it isn't reasonable. I'm opposed to affirmative action, but if you're going to advocate for affirmative action and benefit from it (as Warren has on both counts) then she should honor the law's intent rather than a mere technicality of being 1/32nd Cherokee. Great, that means that she's likely 31/32nd Euro ancestry. She looks completely Euro. So, if she believes that affirmative action is needed because minorities are routinely discriminated against based on their physical appearance, she never suffered that discrimination because she looks white. She then took a position away from an affirmative action candidate who may have suffered discrimination based on their appearance.Her name sounds Euro. So, if she believes that affirmative action is needed because minorities are routinely discriminated against based on blind resumes based on their name sounding too ethnic, she never suffered that discrimination because her name doesn't sound ethnic. She then took a position away from an affirmative action candidate who may have suffered discrimination based on their ethnic sounding name.If she beieves that affirmative action is necessary to give back to a descendent who's ancestors were discriminated against, then a much smaller percentage of her ancestors were discriminated against than the typical person seeking redress va affirmative action. Thus, under the redress view of affirmative action she's taking a position from someone who had far more ancestors discriminated against and thus a stronger claim for redress.It's fine to identify for her to identify with that part of her ancestry, but it's kind of cheesy to use it as an extra career boost contrary to the intent of affirmative action which it appears she may have.

For better or worse, the legal justification for affirmative action has nothing to do with past discrimination.I also don't think there's much evidence at all that she benefitted from it. My understanding is that she answered a self-identified in questionairres as a Native American from 1986 to 1995. By which time she was already an established law professor at Texas, moving to Penn. Charles Fried (Reagan's Solicitor General) has said that her self-identification was never considered when she was hired at Harvard. If there is a complaint, it's that Warren likely self-identified to allow the institutions she served to be able to avoid charges that they were not diverse enough. Which might be valid, but seems like an odd criticism for AA opponents to make.There's absolutely no doubt that she wasn't a token at HLS. She was a rock star. Students killed to get in her classes.

 

[NCCommish]

What's the statute of limitations on claiming an ethnicity? 1/32 doesn't seem like much to me, but maybe it is a reasonable amount by current standards?

No, it isn't reasonable. I'm opposed to affirmative action, but if you're going to advocate for affirmative action and benefit from it (as Warren has on both counts) then she should honor the law's intent rather than a mere technicality of being 1/32nd Cherokee. Great, that means that she's likely 31/32nd Euro ancestry.

She looks completely Euro. So, if she believes that affirmative action is needed because minorities are routinely discriminated against based on their physical appearance, she never suffered that discrimination because she looks white. She then took a position away from an affirmative action candidate who may have suffered discrimination based on their appearance.

Her name sounds Euro. So, if she believes that affirmative action is needed because minorities are routinely discriminated against based on blind resumes based on their name sounding too ethnic, she never suffered that discrimination because her name doesn't sound ethnic. She then took a position away from an affirmative action candidate who may have suffered discrimination based on their ethnic sounding name.

If she beieves that affirmative action is necessary to give back to a descendent who's ancestors were discriminated against, then a much smaller percentage of her ancestors were discriminated against than the typical person seeking redress va affirmative action. Thus, under the redress view of affirmative action she's taking a position from someone who had far more ancestors discriminated against and thus a stronger claim for redress.

It's fine to identify for her to identify with that part of her ancestry, but it's kind of cheesy to use it as an extra career boost contrary to the intent of affirmative action which it appears she may have.

Yeah because every American Indian looks like Sitting Bull and has a name like deer running at dawn. What ridiculous statements.

 

[Dinsy Ejotuz]

Thank you, Glenn Beck.

Speaking of this, has the other guy... Keith Olbermann ... completely disappeared from the face of the earth?

Hopefully.

I forget where, but I did just see something that said he wanted to go back to ESPN. I didn't follow the jump but had the impression maybe ESPN wasn't excited about the opportunity.

 

[Joe T]

What's the statute of limitations on claiming an ethnicity? 1/32 doesn't seem like much to me, but maybe it is a reasonable amount by current standards?

No, it isn't reasonable. I'm opposed to affirmative action, but if you're going to advocate for affirmative action and benefit from it (as Warren has on both counts) then she should honor the law's intent rather than a mere technicality of being 1/32nd Cherokee. Great, that means that she's likely 31/32nd Euro ancestry.

She looks completely Euro. So, if she believes that affirmative action is needed because minorities are routinely discriminated against based on their physical appearance, she never suffered that discrimination because she looks white. She then took a position away from an affirmative action candidate who may have suffered discrimination based on their appearance.

Her name sounds Euro. So, if she believes that affirmative action is needed because minorities are routinely discriminated against based on blind resumes based on their name sounding too ethnic, she never suffered that discrimination because her name doesn't sound ethnic. She then took a position away from an affirmative action candidate who may have suffered discrimination based on their ethnic sounding name.

If she beieves that affirmative action is necessary to give back to a descendent who's ancestors were discriminated against, then a much smaller percentage of her ancestors were discriminated against than the typical person seeking redress va affirmative action. Thus, under the redress view of affirmative action she's taking a position from someone who had far more ancestors discriminated against and thus a stronger claim for redress.

It's fine to identify for her to identify with that part of her ancestry, but it's kind of cheesy to use it as an extra career boost contrary to the intent of affirmative action which it appears she may have.

Yeah because every American Indian looks like Sitting Bull and has a name like deer running at dawn. What ridiculous statements.

What is your stance on how much ethnicity you need to have to claim it?I am okay with claiming to be a part ethnic if its your parents or even grandparents. Great, great, great grandparents seems like a bit of a stretch. But who am I to judge? Good for her for taking advantage of a technicality.

 

[Sweet J]

For what it's worth, Cherokee is one of the only Tribes that doesn't have a blood quantum requirement for enrollment of the Tribe (many Tribes require 1/4 or 1/8 blood quantum; this really sucks in situation where your mom is 1/4 Tribe A, and 1/4 Tribe B, and your dad is 1/4 Tribe C and 1/4 Tribe D, and all of the Tribes have a 1/4 blood quantum requirement; meaning you can never register with a Tribe as a "native american" even though you grew up dirt poor on a reservation). With Cherokke, you just need to prove ancestry. Now, proving ansestry is not walk in the park; it generally means that you have to trace your ancestry back to the original Dawes Rolls, where individuals were given their own piece of "allotted land." But easy enough to do if it actually happened.

Again, Warren, as a superstar law professor, should have known better. It is insulting (at best) to claim ansestry in any sort of "official" capacity.

 

[Dinsy Ejotuz]

it's kind of cheesy to use it as an extra career boost contrary to the intent of affirmative action which it appears she may have.

Totally agree with this Ramsey. Just don't think you throw out her 20 years work for that.And her Qs so far on the Banking Committee have been A++.

 

[Ramsay Hunt Experience]

For what it's worth, Cherokee is one of the only Tribes that doesn't have a blood quantum requirement for enrollment of the Tribe (many Tribes require 1/4 or 1/8 blood quantum; this really sucks in situation where your mom is 1/4 Tribe A, and 1/4 Tribe B, and your dad is 1/4 Tribe C and 1/4 Tribe D, and all of the Tribes have a 1/4 blood quantum requirement; meaning you can never register with a Tribe as a "native american" even though you grew up dirt poor on a reservation). With Cherokke, you just need to prove ancestry. Now, proving ansestry is not walk in the park; it generally means that you have to trace your ancestry back to the original Dawes Rolls, where individuals were given their own piece of "allotted land." But easy enough to do if it actually happened.

Of course, if you're of Freedmen ancestry, you're screwed.

 

[Sweet J]

it's kind of cheesy to use it as an extra career boost contrary to the intent of affirmative action which it appears she may have.

Totally agree with this Ramsey. Just don't think you throw out her 20 years work for that.

This is an interesting philosophical point. At one point does a person's "other good work" make up for some action that you find kind of dirt-baggish?For example, I think I don't have a problem with Clinton's philandering, at all. And Ray Lewis being involved in a fight that where a man got killed . . . I'm just kind-of "meh" on. And this vegetarian guy is ready to forgive Mike Vick if is as sincerely sorry as he appears to be.The difference here is that Lewis and Vick seem to be truly sorry about their actions. I'd love to see whether Warren has owned her action or was sorry about it. That would probably go a long way with me.And Clinton is, well, Clinton. Who can stay mad at that guy?

 

[NCCommish]

What's the statute of limitations on claiming an ethnicity? 1/32 doesn't seem like much to me, but maybe it is a reasonable amount by current standards?

No, it isn't reasonable. I'm opposed to affirmative action, but if you're going to advocate for affirmative action and benefit from it (as Warren has on both counts) then she should honor the law's intent rather than a mere technicality of being 1/32nd Cherokee. Great, that means that she's likely 31/32nd Euro ancestry.

She looks completely Euro. So, if she believes that affirmative action is needed because minorities are routinely discriminated against based on their physical appearance, she never suffered that discrimination because she looks white. She then took a position away from an affirmative action candidate who may have suffered discrimination based on their appearance.

Her name sounds Euro. So, if she believes that affirmative action is needed because minorities are routinely discriminated against based on blind resumes based on their name sounding too ethnic, she never suffered that discrimination because her name doesn't sound ethnic. She then took a position away from an affirmative action candidate who may have suffered discrimination based on their ethnic sounding name.

If she beieves that affirmative action is necessary to give back to a descendent who's ancestors were discriminated against, then a much smaller percentage of her ancestors were discriminated against than the typical person seeking redress va affirmative action. Thus, under the redress view of affirmative action she's taking a position from someone who had far more ancestors discriminated against and thus a stronger claim for redress.

It's fine to identify for her to identify with that part of her ancestry, but it's kind of cheesy to use it as an extra career boost contrary to the intent of affirmative action which it appears she may have.

Yeah because every American Indian looks like Sitting Bull and has a name like deer running at dawn. What ridiculous statements.

What is your stance on how much ethnicity you need to have to claim it?I am okay with claiming to be a part ethnic if its your parents or even grandparents. Great, great, great grandparents seems like a bit of a stretch. But who am I to judge? Good for her for taking advantage of a technicality.

According to a genealogist that did our family tree my great,great grandmother on my fathers side was Cherokee. If true that gives me at least as much Cherokee ancestry as many current tribal elders. And as pointed out if Warrens claims are accurate she has the same amount of Cherokee blood as the current chief. So if it's good enough to get to be chief seems to be enough to claim.

 

[Jewell]

What's the statute of limitations on claiming an ethnicity? 1/32 doesn't seem like much to me, but maybe it is a reasonable amount by current standards?

No, it isn't reasonable. I'm opposed to affirmative action, but if you're going to advocate for affirmative action and benefit from it (as Warren has on both counts) then she should honor the law's intent rather than a mere technicality of being 1/32nd Cherokee. Great, that means that she's likely 31/32nd Euro ancestry.

She looks completely Euro. So, if she believes that affirmative action is needed because minorities are routinely discriminated against based on their physical appearance, she never suffered that discrimination because she looks white. She then took a position away from an affirmative action candidate who may have suffered discrimination based on their appearance.

Her name sounds Euro. So, if she believes that affirmative action is needed because minorities are routinely discriminated against based on blind resumes based on their name sounding too ethnic, she never suffered that discrimination because her name doesn't sound ethnic. She then took a position away from an affirmative action candidate who may have suffered discrimination based on their ethnic sounding name.

If she beieves that affirmative action is necessary to give back to a descendent who's ancestors were discriminated against, then a much smaller percentage of her ancestors were discriminated against than the typical person seeking redress va affirmative action. Thus, under the redress view of affirmative action she's taking a position from someone who had far more ancestors discriminated against and thus a stronger claim for redress.

It's fine to identify for her to identify with that part of her ancestry, but it's kind of cheesy to use it as an extra career boost contrary to the intent of affirmative action which it appears she may have.

Yeah because every American Indian looks like Sitting Bull and has a name like deer running at dawn. What ridiculous statements.

No, they don't. I was out with a Navajo couple the other night. They both work at the Smithsonian Museum of Native American History. By appearance you would think he is Japanese and she is Hispanic. They would agree with me regarding the above points.

 

[Go DC Yourself]

Anyone that focuses on this whole 'Native American' silliness and ignores her decades of work on banking and why the middle class is being hollowed out is missing the forest for the trees.

Shhh. That's how elections are lost. Let them keep doing it. We still haven't seen those Obama transcripts yet, have we? :}

 

[Sweet J]

According to a genealogist that did our family tree my great,great grandmother on my fathers side was Cherokee. If true that gives me at least as much Cherokee ancestry as many current tribal elders. And as pointed out if Warrens claims are accurate she has the same amount of Cherokee blood as the current chief. So if it's good enough to get to be chief seems to be enough to claim.

Claiming ancestry for Native Americans is quite different than claiming black (say) ancestry. There are strict rules for proof.Here is how you register as a member of the Cherokee Tribe. Here is another link. You are right, if Warren can fill out one of these forms, and have it accepted and she can become an enrolled member of the Tribe, than she (and you) should by all means claim ancestry.

But if she didn't do that, than no, she did not do as much as the current chief.

 

[timschochet]

What specific advantage did Warren gain by claiming Native American ancestry? I'm not clear on this.

 

[Dinsy Ejotuz]

This is an interesting philosophical point. At one point does a person's "other good work" make up for some action that you find kind of dirt-baggish?

I think the degree of offense comes into it as well. Is taking advantage of a legal loophole to give your application a boost really as bad as serial philandering, killing someone or running a dog fighting ring?It seems fairly small in the grand scheme of things even though I don't think it speaks well of her. So it's an easy thing to skip over for someone who really admires her research and her willingness to bang on the bankers.

 

[Ramsay Hunt Experience]

According to a genealogist that did our family tree my great,great grandmother on my fathers side was Cherokee. If true that gives me at least as much Cherokee ancestry as many current tribal elders. And as pointed out if Warrens claims are accurate she has the same amount of Cherokee blood as the current chief. So if it's good enough to get to be chief seems to be enough to claim.

Claiming ancestry for Native Americans is quite different than claiming black (say) ancestry. There are strict rules for proof.Here is how you register as a member of the Cherokee Tribe. Here is another link. You are right, if Warren can fill out one of these forms, and have it accepted and she can become an enrolled member of the Tribe, than she (and you) should by all means claim ancestry.

But if she didn't do that, than no, she did not do as much as the current chief.

There are strict rules for receiving tribal benefits. She didn't ask for tribal benefits. Do you really think that everyone who checks the box for Native American on an application is obligated to check the Dawes rolls? That there's some uniquely burdensome duty to investigate that doesn't exist for other minorities?

 

[NCCommish]

What's the statute of limitations on claiming an ethnicity? 1/32 doesn't seem like much to me, but maybe it is a reasonable amount by current standards?

No, it isn't reasonable. I'm opposed to affirmative action, but if you're going to advocate for affirmative action and benefit from it (as Warren has on both counts) then she should honor the law's intent rather than a mere technicality of being 1/32nd Cherokee. Great, that means that she's likely 31/32nd Euro ancestry.

She looks completely Euro. So, if she believes that affirmative action is needed because minorities are routinely discriminated against based on their physical appearance, she never suffered that discrimination because she looks white. She then took a position away from an affirmative action candidate who may have suffered discrimination based on their appearance.

Her name sounds Euro. So, if she believes that affirmative action is needed because minorities are routinely discriminated against based on blind resumes based on their name sounding too ethnic, she never suffered that discrimination because her name doesn't sound ethnic. She then took a position away from an affirmative action candidate who may have suffered discrimination based on their ethnic sounding name.

If she beieves that affirmative action is necessary to give back to a descendent who's ancestors were discriminated against, then a much smaller percentage of her ancestors were discriminated against than the typical person seeking redress va affirmative action. Thus, under the redress view of affirmative action she's taking a position from someone who had far more ancestors discriminated against and thus a stronger claim for redress.

It's fine to identify for her to identify with that part of her ancestry, but it's kind of cheesy to use it as an extra career boost contrary to the intent of affirmative action which it appears she may have.

Yeah because every American Indian looks like Sitting Bull and has a name like deer running at dawn. What ridiculous statements.

No, they don't. I was out with a Navajo couple the other night. They both work at the Smithsonian Museum of Native American History. By appearance you would think he is Japanese and she is Hispanic. They would agree with me regarding the above points.

Then why bring it up? And please point me to the proof that Warren received some kind of extra help because of a racial claim. Scott Brown spent a lot and never found any but I am sure you will.

The Globe obtained a portion of Warren’s application to Rutgers, which asks if prospective students want to apply for admission under the school’s Program for Minority Group Students. Warren answered “no.”

For her employment documents at the University of Texas, Warren indicated that she was “white.”

The Herald has twice quoted Charles Fried, the head of the Harvard appointing committee that recommended Warren for her position in 1995, saying that the Democratic candidate’s heritage didn’t come up during the course of her hiring. “It simply played no role in the appointments process,” he said. “It was not mentioned and I didn’t mention it to the faculty.”

The Herald later quoted Fried, a former U.S. Solicitor General under President Ronald Reagan, saying, “I can state categorically that the subject of her Native American ancestry never once was mentioned.”

Brown said that Warren “checked the box claiming she was Native American” when she applied to Harvard and Penn, suggesting the Democratic candidate somehow gained an unfair advantage because of an iffy ethnic background. But there is no proof that she ever marked a form to tell the schools about her heritage, nor is there any public evidence that the universities knew about her lineage before hiring her.

WaPo fact checker

good luck

 

[NCCommish]

BTW at this point I don't really care if she claimed to be the lost daughter of the last Russian Czar. It's just awesome to hear these guys called out by someone they were so afraid of. And to see her prove why they should've been.

 

[timschochet]

Is she didn't receive any benefits, then why the criticism? Heck if I were part Cherokee I'd be damn proud about it and let everybody know. What's wrong with that?

 

[timschochet]

BTW at this point I don't really care if she claimed to be the lost daughter of the last Russian Czar.

I'd care. That would be awesome!

 

[Jewell]

it's kind of cheesy to use it as an extra career boost contrary to the intent of affirmative action which it appears she may have.

Totally agree with this Ramsey. Just don't think you throw out her 20 years work for that.And her Qs so far on the Banking Committee have been A++.

Who said I was throwing out her work or her credentials? Please point to where I did that.

Was my first post in this thread not in agreement with Warren's banking position in the OP.

 

[Joe T]

it's kind of cheesy to use it as an extra career boost contrary to the intent of affirmative action which it appears she may have.

Totally agree with this Ramsey. Just don't think you throw out her 20 years work for that.And her Qs so far on the Banking Committee have been A++.

Who said I was throwing out her work or her credentials? Please point to where I did that.

Was my first post in this thread not in agreement with Warren's banking position in the OP.

 

[Ramsay Hunt Experience]

What specific advantage did Warren gain by claiming Native American ancestry? I'm not clear on this.

If we accept every adverse inference against her, we say that someone, somewhere may have taken into account in the time from when she was teaching law at the University of Texas and the time she became a tenured professor at Harvard Law School.But here's what I think happened. In the late 80s and early 90s, law schools were hearing a lot of complaints that their faculties were not diverse enough. So the law schools would send out a questionairre to their faculty (which I think was created by the ABA) so that the ABA could report on the diversity of the faculty. I've received several similar things where I've worked where I've been invited to self-report.Like Warren, I'm in the position where I've been told by my mother that I have an ancestor (called "Jesse James RamseyHunt") who was Cherokee (and rumored to have been associated with the James gang). I've always checked "white" in those surveys, in part because the family legend has always seemed kind of sketchy to me. But it's not as if I put a lot of thought into those surveys, because they're not really used on an individual basis. They're used so the firm or organization can report in aggregrate.So I think she probably was fairly confident that she could have been able to claim Native American heritage in employement and other matters. So that her institutions could fairly claim her for diversity. We can argue that this highlights the bogus nature of the "diversity" justification for AA or for striving for diversity for its own sake. I kind of agree with that argument. I support AA but think diversity as a value is kind of silly. I support it because I think that minorities can only protect themselves through full participation in society.

 

[Dinsy Ejotuz]

it's kind of cheesy to use it as an extra career boost contrary to the intent of affirmative action which it appears she may have.

Totally agree with this Ramsey. Just don't think you throw out her 20 years work for that.And her Qs so far on the Banking Committee have been A++.

Who said I was throwing out her work or her credentials? Please point to where I did that.

Was my first post in this thread not in agreement with Warren's banking position in the OP.

Sorry Jewell, I don't think that's even your quote. I bungled things when I trimmed it down.As for the 20 years thing, I wasn't singling anyone in particular out (including Ramsey). But it does seem like some people are doing that when they say she was elected in spite of this incredible character flaw.

 

[timschochet]

What specific advantage did Warren gain by claiming Native American ancestry? I'm not clear on this.

If we accept every adverse inference against her, we say that someone, somewhere may have taken into account in the time from when she was teaching law at the University of Texas and the time she became a tenured professor at Harvard Law School.But here's what I think happened. In the late 80s and early 90s, law schools were hearing a lot of complaints that their faculties were not diverse enough. So the law schools would send out a questionairre to their faculty (which I think was created by the ABA) so that the ABA could report on the diversity of the faculty. I've received several similar things where I've worked where I've been invited to self-report.Like Warren, I'm in the position where I've been told by my mother that I have an ancestor (called "Jesse James RamseyHunt") who was Cherokee (and rumored to have been associated with the James gang). I've always checked "white" in those surveys, in part because the family legend has always seemed kind of sketchy to me. But it's not as if I put a lot of thought into those surveys, because they're not really used on an individual basis. They're used so the firm or organization can report in aggregrate.So I think she probably was fairly confident that she could have been able to claim Native American heritage in employement and other matters. So that her institutions could fairly claim her for diversity. We can argue that this highlights the bogus nature of the "diversity" justification for AA or for striving for diversity for its own sake. I kind of agree with that argument. I support AA but think diversity as a value is kind of silly. I support it because I think that minorities can only protect themselves through full participation in society.

If this is all there is, then it's pretty shameful that people are making such a big deal out of it.

 

[Sweet J]

There are strict rules for receiving tribal benefits. She didn't ask for tribal benefits. Do you really think that everyone who checks the box for Native American on an application is obligated to check the Dawes rolls? That there's some uniquely burdensome duty to investigate that doesn't exist for other minorities?

That's a good point. And NCC's follow up email from wapo fact checker is enough for me.I happen to be a little ornery this morning, because I work in an organization in which having non-native ancestry is detrimental to career advancement. And I hate being reminded about that. But that's my problem, not Warren's (who, by all accounts, is quality).Plus, I've hijacked this thing enough. Sorry NCC.

 

[Ramsay Hunt Experience]

I happen to be a little ornery this morning, because I work in an organization in which having non-native ancestry is detrimental to career advancement.

I will ask my spirit guide to put in a good word for you.

 

[Joe T]

What specific advantage did Warren gain by claiming Native American ancestry? I'm not clear on this.

If we accept every adverse inference against her, we say that someone, somewhere may have taken into account in the time from when she was teaching law at the University of Texas and the time she became a tenured professor at Harvard Law School.But here's what I think happened. In the late 80s and early 90s, law schools were hearing a lot of complaints that their faculties were not diverse enough. So the law schools would send out a questionairre to their faculty (which I think was created by the ABA) so that the ABA could report on the diversity of the faculty. I've received several similar things where I've worked where I've been invited to self-report.Like Warren, I'm in the position where I've been told by my mother that I have an ancestor (called "Jesse James RamseyHunt") who was Cherokee (and rumored to have been associated with the James gang). I've always checked "white" in those surveys, in part because the family legend has always seemed kind of sketchy to me. But it's not as if I put a lot of thought into those surveys, because they're not really used on an individual basis. They're used so the firm or organization can report in aggregrate.So I think she probably was fairly confident that she could have been able to claim Native American heritage in employement and other matters. So that her institutions could fairly claim her for diversity. We can argue that this highlights the bogus nature of the "diversity" justification for AA or for striving for diversity for its own sake. I kind of agree with that argument. I support AA but think diversity as a value is kind of silly. I support it because I think that minorities can only protect themselves through full participation in society.

If this is all there is, then it's pretty shameful that people are making such a big deal out of it.

Sort of like the sequester.

 

[T Bell]

Referring to the HSBC scandal:

“You know, if you’re caught with an ounce of cocaine, the chances are good you’re going to go to jail,” Warren said. “If it happens repeatedly, you may go to jail for the rest of your life. But evidently, if you launder nearly a billion dollars for drug cartels and violate our international sanctions, your company pays a fine and you go home and sleep in your own bed at night, every single individual associated with this. I think that’s fundamentally wrong.”

I just love the work she is doing on the banking committee.

 

[timschochet]

What specific advantage did Warren gain by claiming Native American ancestry? I'm not clear on this.

If we accept every adverse inference against her, we say that someone, somewhere may have taken into account in the time from when she was teaching law at the University of Texas and the time she became a tenured professor at Harvard Law School.But here's what I think happened. In the late 80s and early 90s, law schools were hearing a lot of complaints that their faculties were not diverse enough. So the law schools would send out a questionairre to their faculty (which I think was created by the ABA) so that the ABA could report on the diversity of the faculty. I've received several similar things where I've worked where I've been invited to self-report.Like Warren, I'm in the position where I've been told by my mother that I have an ancestor (called "Jesse James RamseyHunt") who was Cherokee (and rumored to have been associated with the James gang). I've always checked "white" in those surveys, in part because the family legend has always seemed kind of sketchy to me. But it's not as if I put a lot of thought into those surveys, because they're not really used on an individual basis. They're used so the firm or organization can report in aggregrate.So I think she probably was fairly confident that she could have been able to claim Native American heritage in employement and other matters. So that her institutions could fairly claim her for diversity. We can argue that this highlights the bogus nature of the "diversity" justification for AA or for striving for diversity for its own sake. I kind of agree with that argument. I support AA but think diversity as a value is kind of silly. I support it because I think that minorities can only protect themselves through full participation in society.

If this is all there is, then it's pretty shameful that people are making such a big deal out of it.

Sort of like the sequester.

Really? People are being hurt by the sequester. Who's being hurt here?

 

[T Bell]

I think she's doing a fantastic job of bringing these things to light publicly, but let's see if anything comes of it.

 

[Joe T]

What specific advantage did Warren gain by claiming Native American ancestry? I'm not clear on this.

If we accept every adverse inference against her, we say that someone, somewhere may have taken into account in the time from when she was teaching law at the University of Texas and the time she became a tenured professor at Harvard Law School.But here's what I think happened. In the late 80s and early 90s, law schools were hearing a lot of complaints that their faculties were not diverse enough. So the law schools would send out a questionairre to their faculty (which I think was created by the ABA) so that the ABA could report on the diversity of the faculty. I've received several similar things where I've worked where I've been invited to self-report.Like Warren, I'm in the position where I've been told by my mother that I have an ancestor (called "Jesse James RamseyHunt") who was Cherokee (and rumored to have been associated with the James gang). I've always checked "white" in those surveys, in part because the family legend has always seemed kind of sketchy to me. But it's not as if I put a lot of thought into those surveys, because they're not really used on an individual basis. They're used so the firm or organization can report in aggregrate.So I think she probably was fairly confident that she could have been able to claim Native American heritage in employement and other matters. So that her institutions could fairly claim her for diversity. We can argue that this highlights the bogus nature of the "diversity" justification for AA or for striving for diversity for its own sake. I kind of agree with that argument. I support AA but think diversity as a value is kind of silly. I support it because I think that minorities can only protect themselves through full participation in society.

If this is all there is, then it's pretty shameful that people are making such a big deal out of it.

Sort of like the sequester.

Really? People are being hurt by the sequester. Who's being hurt here?

Where did I say people were being hurt here?

 

[fatguyinalittlecoat]

I happen to be a little ornery this morning, because I work in an organization in which having non-native ancestry is detrimental to career advancement.

I will ask my spirit guide to put in a good word for you.

Ready to smoke the peace pipe with you anytime, kemosabe.

 

[Boston]

Warren can go on to be the best Senator in US history (and I actually like her attacking these banking guys) but there is little doubt she was a complete fraud in this past campaign...she made up her ancestry claim and looked like a complete fool when she got pressed on it...she also tried to potray herself as a kid who grew up in a tough situation and that was proven false...there were also other issues involving her flipping Real Estate and teaching only one-class while making big money at Harvard...that's fine except those were the exact type of situations she was attacking in the campaign as she claimed to represent the "little guy"...she lives in a very wealthy section of "the People's Republic" of Cambridge and is a legit limousine liberal...like many politicians (of either party) she is the perfect example of someone who practices a do as I say and not as I do attitude...

As for Scott Brown his win a few years ago may have actually hurt the GOP in Mass...the Bay State is a one-party state and it is amazing how many creeps, felons and idiots not only get elected but barely have to break a sweat to do so (I mean John Tierney...seriously?)...the GOP in Mass is closer to being a college club than a viable organization...Brown's win was the political equivalent of "The Miracle on Ice"...while it was a great story it also woke up the left and has made sure they will not take another race for granted...the GOP has a huge hill to climb and outside of Brown running for Governor the immediate future looks very bleak to end one-party rule...

 

[SacramentoBob]

Warren can go on to be the best Senator in US history (and I actually like her attacking these banking guys) but there is little doubt she was a complete fraud in this past campaign...she made up her ancestry claim and looked like a complete fool when she got pressed on it...she also tried to potray herself as a kid who grew up in a tough situation and that was proven false...there were also other issues involving her flipping Real Estate and teaching only one-class while making big money at Harvard...that's fine except those were the exact type of situations she was attacking in the campaign as she claimed to represent the "little guy"...she lives in a very wealthy section of "the People's Republic" of Cambridge and is a legit limousine liberal...like many politicians (of either party) she is the perfect example of someone who practices a do as I say and not as I do attitude...

Sounds like a female Mitt Romney. Must be something about that state.

 

[Boston]

Warren can go on to be the best Senator in US history (and I actually like her attacking these banking guys) but there is little doubt she was a complete fraud in this past campaign...she made up her ancestry claim and looked like a complete fool when she got pressed on it...she also tried to potray herself as a kid who grew up in a tough situation and that was proven false...there were also other issues involving her flipping Real Estate and teaching only one-class while making big money at Harvard...that's fine except those were the exact type of situations she was attacking in the campaign as she claimed to represent the "little guy"...she lives in a very wealthy section of "the People's Republic" of Cambridge and is a legit limousine liberal...like many politicians (of either party) she is the perfect example of someone who practices a do as I say and not as I do attitude...

Sounds like a female Mitt Romney. Must be something about that state.

The difference is Mitt didn't pretend to be a Mormon to get ahead...

 

[fatguyinalittlecoat]

Warren can go on to be the best Senator in US history (and I actually like her attacking these banking guys) but there is little doubt she was a complete fraud in this past campaign...she made up her ancestry claim and looked like a complete fool when she got pressed on it...she also tried to potray herself as a kid who grew up in a tough situation and that was proven false...there were also other issues involving her flipping Real Estate and teaching only one-class while making big money at Harvard...that's fine except those were the exact type of situations she was attacking in the campaign as she claimed to represent the "little guy"...she lives in a very wealthy section of "the People's Republic" of Cambridge and is a legit limousine liberal...like many politicians (of either party) she is the perfect example of someone who practices a do as I say and not as I do attitude...

Sounds like a female Mitt Romney. Must be something about that state.

The difference is Mitt didn't pretend to be a Mormon to get ahead...

I suspect that being the son of a governor helped Mitt WAY more than allegedly being 1/32 Cherokee helped Warren. Yet I think you would have a tough time getting Mitt to acknowledge that.

 

[Slapdash]

Warren can go on to be the best Senator in US history (and I actually like her attacking these banking guys) but there is little doubt she was a complete fraud in this past campaign...she made up her ancestry claim and looked like a complete fool when she got pressed on it...she also tried to potray herself as a kid who grew up in a tough situation and that was proven false...there were also other issues involving her flipping Real Estate and teaching only one-class while making big money at Harvard...that's fine except those were the exact type of situations she was attacking in the campaign as she claimed to represent the "little guy"...she lives in a very wealthy section of "the People's Republic" of Cambridge and is a legit limousine liberal...like many politicians (of either party) she is the perfect example of someone who practices a do as I say and not as I do attitude...

I don't get this at all. Should she be living in the ghetto to be able to advocate liberal policies?

 

[The Commish]

Warren can go on to be the best Senator in US history (and I actually like her attacking these banking guys) but there is little doubt she was a complete fraud in this past campaign...she made up her ancestry claim and looked like a complete fool when she got pressed on it...she also tried to potray herself as a kid who grew up in a tough situation and that was proven false...there were also other issues involving her flipping Real Estate and teaching only one-class while making big money at Harvard...that's fine except those were the exact type of situations she was attacking in the campaign as she claimed to represent the "little guy"...she lives in a very wealthy section of "the People's Republic" of Cambridge and is a legit limousine liberal...like many politicians (of either party) she is the perfect example of someone who practices a do as I say and not as I do attitude...As for Scott Brown his win a few years ago may have actually hurt the GOP in Mass...the Bay State is a one-party state and it is amazing how many creeps, felons and idiots not only get elected but barely have to break a sweat to do so (I mean John Tierney...seriously?)...the GOP in Mass is closer to being a college club than a viable organization...Brown's win was the political equivalent of "The Miracle on Ice"...while it was a great story it also woke up the left and has made sure they will not take another race for granted...the GOP has a huge hill to climb and outside of Brown running for Governor the immediate future looks very bleak to end one-party rule...

So if we're being honest here...there are few politicians who AREN'T "complete frauds" if this is your standard for determination.

 

[Boston]

Warren can go on to be the best Senator in US history (and I actually like her attacking these banking guys) but there is little doubt she was a complete fraud in this past campaign...she made up her ancestry claim and looked like a complete fool when she got pressed on it...she also tried to potray herself as a kid who grew up in a tough situation and that was proven false...there were also other issues involving her flipping Real Estate and teaching only one-class while making big money at Harvard...that's fine except those were the exact type of situations she was attacking in the campaign as she claimed to represent the "little guy"...she lives in a very wealthy section of "the People's Republic" of Cambridge and is a legit limousine liberal...like many politicians (of either party) she is the perfect example of someone who practices a do as I say and not as I do attitude...

Sounds like a female Mitt Romney. Must be something about that state.

The difference is Mitt didn't pretend to be a Mormon to get ahead...

I suspect that being the son of a governor helped Mitt WAY more than allegedly being 1/32 Cherokee helped Warren. Yet I think you would have a tough time getting Mitt to acknowledge that.

You're probably right but I don't think Mitt ever lied about being the son of a Governor though...

 

[The Commish]

Warren can go on to be the best Senator in US history (and I actually like her attacking these banking guys) but there is little doubt she was a complete fraud in this past campaign...she made up her ancestry claim and looked like a complete fool when she got pressed on it...she also tried to potray herself as a kid who grew up in a tough situation and that was proven false...there were also other issues involving her flipping Real Estate and teaching only one-class while making big money at Harvard...that's fine except those were the exact type of situations she was attacking in the campaign as she claimed to represent the "little guy"...she lives in a very wealthy section of "the People's Republic" of Cambridge and is a legit limousine liberal...like many politicians (of either party) she is the perfect example of someone who practices a do as I say and not as I do attitude...

Sounds like a female Mitt Romney. Must be something about that state.

The difference is Mitt didn't pretend to be a Mormon to get ahead...

He did pretend to be a lot of other things though. Does it matter WHAT they were pretending to be or that they were pretending in the first place?? The WHAT seems like a dubious, political hackish path to go down IMO.