Hello E and Gunnar -
There's a false idea in right wing discourse that Warren lied about her Native American heritage in order to benefit from Affirmative Action to get academic posts she otherwise could not hack. If Warren wins the Democratic nomination, we're gonna be subjected to that relentlessly. And thanks to false balance in the media, it'll be treated as a major controversy.
The more accurate version is that Warren believed she had Native American heritage due to a family legend. If you are from the right parts of the country and of the right age, which Warren is, this is super common. Everyone has a "Cherokee princess" in their family line. Warren got into this idea and began claiming she was part Native American, which was then picked up by where she worked to boast of their diversity hires.
When this became controversial, Warren tried to defend herself by providing evidence that no, she really has Native American heritage. This is offensive to tribal groups because being Native American for them isn't about having the right admixture of DNA. It's about being raised in and participating in tribal culture. Warren doesn't have that, and her defenses just completely neglected what Native Americans themselves believe about what constitutes being Native American. She has no real tribal affiliation. This is bad, but it's also so stereotypical of someone her age from the part of the country she is from. She's since apologized for this and as far as controversies go, it's well beneath what occurs in the Trump admin on a literal weekly basis.
If Warren wins the nomination, what's probably going to happen is that leftwing critics who understand the second issue are going to be used to prove that there is validity to the first one.
She wasn't dishonest. She was clueless. It has basically no bearing on what she'd be like as a President and reads to me as a distraction.
For someone who throws the word racist around like a frisbee you should be a little more perceptive. Her family stories yarn is well understood and publicized. Her honesty to those that understand her whole decades of clueless when she had no business being clueless is a little more suspect.
I have a law degree. Indian law runs through almost all areas of law and when you become a professor in commercial law and consumer protection you can't avoid it. It removes cases in criminal law, it enhances punishment and punitive damages in other areas and both of those are different one is blood the other affiliation, and this certainly isn't all just two basic examples. She had of taught students they could have ethical problems if they don't ask about affiliation in order to properly represent clients. She would have shown them where to look it up if a client says they do have. She knows.
Basic to any Indian law is tribal affiliation. In her own video she made in attempt to meet Trumps $1M charity challenge she even admitted that she knew the difference between affiliation and ethnicity. The admittance opens the floodgates to her education on the very stunt she was pulling. She apologizes because she knows she can avoid getting deeper into the mud of how dishonest it was by saying mea culpa and my mama and papa said so. This is clear to someone like me who has a law degree and has taken Indian law and dealt with the overlap many times while practicing. I simply cannot believe those silly defenses. She knew all along.
The cheekbones trope she tried pulling would be a front and center for you against Trump if that was on the other foot and racist with capital letters would be yelled. Are you going to defend someone as not anti-semitic who says Jews control Hollywood as a part of a plan to control you and the world and they have big noses. Because the cheekbones routine is right there. You defending her would be like me saying a racist black trope and then you defend me because my "mama and papa" (Jesus Christ) taught me that blacks sinned in the pre-existence, what? it's what they taught me. And you claiming any false equivalence there would just show how naïve you are toward ignorance concerning native Americans. She knew and knows.
I don't believe she tried getting into Harvard as a minority or enhance her career, I believe her politics and positions received the old false authority enhancement and virtue signaled, "as a woman of Native American ancestry" trope. That is why Charlemagne Tha God got her flustered and she had to return to it's what my family taught me https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BxVoXVwriOM
around the 20:00 mark. He was nailing her on that proper angle of virtue signaling and race joining. It is a serious matter and naïve to believe that such an educated woman from Oklahoma for that matter would be so ridiculously naïve as your commonly and well understood supposed accurate version. She knows Nara.gov. She knew.
Why don't you give Trump his family history and culture defenses to how clumsy he is with his language and thought? I just find it face palming from both of them. And before you get in a tizzy and start typing, sure Trump is worse.
Here's one leaning left publication that gets closer to the reality: https://www.gq.com/story/elizabeth-warren-dna-tests
I am encouraged by the fact that you like her policies, but I don't think it is entirely fair to her to accuse her of dishonesty concerning her tribal affiliation confusion.
No it isn't, and I still won't call you names, you are just wrong.
You should read her book, A fighting Chance.
I stopped reading candidates books long ago, they are just advertisements and means to reinforce possible cognitive dissonance. I believe it one should read the oppositions books to avoid dissonance. I already stated her policies are what are attracting me. I read policies and I vote on policies. I want the bad for every one I consider so I seek it out in a balanced and fair but truthful way. At least as close as possible for me.
In this autobiographical book she talks about how her mother thought, probably honestly but mistakenly, that she had a significant amount of Native American ancestry. She took her mother's word for that, but she never used claims of tribal affiliation to gain any favorable consideration in applications for employment or academic institutions. All institutions with which Warren was associated confirmed that their acceptance of her was entirely based on her academic merit and achievements. When she submitted her DNA samples for analysis and found that the percentage of Native American ancestry was far less than she had been led to believe, she apologized for any confusion she might have created, but I really don't feel that apology was necessary.
Because you don't know the full reality of the issue. Are you trying to convince me that a woman as experienced in the world and educated as Elizabeth Warren didn't know how to search her name on Nara.gov? See my response to E above. You are just not informed but only shown the left side to it.
That she apologized anyway was admirable of her, and I am glad to find that you seem to agree with that
Like I said I like her policies. I am still challenged by this issue and you haven't afforded me anything I wasn't aware of. Just the surface left response.
Extremely well said, EAllusion. It is a scandal that Trump's base supporters turn a blind eye to and try to excuse even the most egregious things he does, while mercilessly excoriating his Democratic and progressive opponents for even the most minor missteps and misdeeds, even imaginary ones.
Good God your tempting me on the name calling back. I better get a rational response from you on how she made the video she made and claimed what she did with percentage DNA nonsense and was not aware of of tribal affiliation or how to just look that up.
All communication relies, to a noticeable extent on evoking knowledge that we cannot tell, all our knowledge of mental processes, like feelings or conscious intellectual activities, is based on a knowledge which we cannot tell.
"Why are you afraid, have you still no faith?" Mark 4:40