patrick.net

Goran_K says

No, there was no truth in this whole saga.

You choose to believe there is no truth, just like there are still people who choose to believe that Obama is not a US citizen in spite of him releasing the long form birth certificate.
Nothing will convince cultists.

doik says

Warren never claimed her mother was oppressed. Nor did she claim to be oppressed herself.

Wrong. She told a story about her grandparents disapproving of her parents love, and made up a romantic story of overcoming racism to be together.

Is Elizabeth Warren lying when she tells this story or not?

How about when she talks about her grandfather having native facial features?

These are obviously both incorrect statements. Do you think they are lies, or is her family just crazy?

Heraclitusstudent says

You choose to believe there is no truth

Yes I believe in mathematics.

doik says

Warren never claimed her mother was oppressed

No she only claimed her parents had to elope due to racism her "native" mother was facing.

That's all.

WookieMan says

Good luck getting to some of these positions of power with being 100% honest. Won't happen.

I'm not going to argue that politicians and politicking is dirty. But that's why it seems to attract a certain type of person.

That being said, I think Trey Gowdy holds a pretty high moral standard "for a politician".

TwoScoopsOfSpaceForce says

So, you agree that most Black and White Americans with fractional (~1-5%) American Indian Ancestry can check the box for American Indian and sign up for all the benefits, get to the head of the line in college and job applications?

I agree that anyone with a single ancestor from an ethic group, by definition, has that ethnicity as part of their genetic makeup and therefore absolutely is honest in checking the checkbox for that ethnic group whether or not they identity culturally with that group.

I do not agree that there is any evidence whatsoever that Elizabeth Warren would not have gotten the job had she not checked that checkbox. Nor does having gotten that job have any relevance on the senator's qualifications today or whether or not you should support those policies. There is no reason other than identity politics that this matter should crawl up anyone's butt.

I also strongly disagree with the very premise of Affirmative Action. It is racist. It is anti-meritocracy. It has nothing to do with getting the best candidate for the job. It should not even be legally allowed on a form.

So, do you support Affirmative Action? Would you not want to see it banned like I do?

I have no problem with a white person reaching a position of power. She should not be condemned for not being "non-white enough". Christ, the people in this thread sound like the anti-white racists on the left. Being white is nothing to be ashamed of.

I'm proud of white culture, not because it's white, but because of all the accomplishments in it. Most white people have some non-white ancestry because all human beings fuck like crazy. So it shouldn't be surprising that Warren has some other ethnic backgrounds. Why is this at all important to the right? It's obviously because they can't make any other attacks on her, and that says everything we need to know.

I'm a fiscal conservative, but I can attack Reagan on his severe deficit spending and I can hold that ground easily against anyone who wants to debate me. I don't have to make some bullshit strawman argument like Reagan was secretly getting policy decisions from astrologers through his wife. If you have a strong position that you can defend with reason and evidence, you have no motivation to make a strawman argument.

There isn't a single president going back to Kennedy that I cannot effectively criticize for making very bad policy decisions. You don't need to use wedge issues, identity politics, and strawmans to criticize policies. This entire thread, which is typical of patrick.net, is so transparently identity politics to anyone who isn't a left or right extremist. The thing is that the people here don't even get how obvious this is to normal, middle of the road Americans who make up 80% of the population. In twenty years you'll look back at these posts and they will seem as absurd as your fashion choices in the 1980s. Your inner voice will say "what was I thinking?"

Goran_K says

doik says

Warren never claimed her mother was oppressed

No she only claimed her parents had to elope due to racism her "native" mother was facing.

That's all.

Also, both she and Harvard were praised for being so deliciously progressive https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052702304371504577406901777485754

"1997 Fordham Law Review article described Democratic Senate hopeful Elizabeth Warren as Harvard Law School's "first woman of color," saying in footnotes that the information was based on a 1996 telephone interview with a Harvard spokesman.

The spokesman cited, Michael Chmura, also described Ms. Warren in a 1996 Harvard "

doik says

Reality says

Sharing 1/1024th with South Americans is actually genetically less Native-American than the average White American in the US

This fact is meaningless. The average has nothing to do with the median. A few Native Americans will have 100% Native American ancestry pushing the average high while the median American will have 0% Native American ancestry. You are grasping at straws.

Please pay close attention to what I wrote. I did not write "average American" but "average White American"! I even capitalized the word "White" for you! The average White American has more Native American DNA than Elizabeth Warren does. The reason average White Americans have a small percentage of Native American DNA is due to both cross-overs and statistical noises.

The bottom line is that Warren in no way lied when she checked off a box in a job application. Having any ethnic ancestry makes it perfectly legitimate to check off such a box.

She did when she changed her race from White to Native American, and her appointment at Harvard Law School was lauded as the first female faculty member of color. Given her law degree from a 3rd rate law school, she would never have qualified as a law professor at Harvard Law School without that "color" card, which now we are finding out she doesn't actually have.

APOCALYPSEFUCKisShostikovitch says

He'd be fucking Warren if she was a porn star famous for sucking off circus animals.

And there would be nothing wrong with that. Stormy Daniels is to the Democrats what Elizabeth Warren's ancestry is the to Republicans. It's an irrelevant wedge issue.

Quite frankly, I wouldn't trust any man to be president if he wasn't banging hot chicks. Sexually frustrated men are dangerous and should not have power. Pretty much every successful head of state has been banging chicks on the side. Examples include Winston Churchill, David Petraeus, Dwight Eisenhower, George Patton, Douglas MacArthur, George Custer, William Sherman, and George Washington. These are the manly men we respect. Who was faithful to his wife? Adolf Hitler, a person we'd call a cuck today. I have no problem with Trump banging porn stars on the side. If I'm going to criticize Trump, it will be for his policies and political appointments, and there is plenty to criticize there.

Reality says

I did not write "average American" but "average White American"! I even capitalized the word "White" for you!

Jesus Christ! In order to even classify people as "white Americans" you must first have a criteria for determining which ethnic groups a person belongs to. So you can't evaluate the average of that set until the criteria is already in place, so it can't be used as the criteria itself. That's circular logic.

Why do you even care about Warren's ancestry?

doik says

Jesus Christ! In order to even classify people as "white Americans" you must first have a criteria for determining which ethnic groups a person belongs to. So you can't evaluate the average of that set until the criteria is already in place, so it can't be used as the criteria itself. That's circular logic.

Now you are talking like a Neo-Nazi racial purist. Out here in the real world, there have been inter-marriages for centuries, and there are statistical noises in DNA analysis. In the real world, the average White American (as in those who identify themselves as White, and everyone else would perceive that person as White) has about 0.2% to 2% genes that in typical DNA analysis would consider signatures of "Native-American DNA."

You know what else is worse about Warren's claim? She didn't even take a standard commercial test, but picked a friendly geneticist, who compared her DNA to Columbian/Mexican/Peruvian DNA! So she is essentially basing a "Native American" claim on 0.1% Mexican/Columbian/Peruvian DNA. Are we sure that's not the 0.1% matching the Spanish/Mediterranean ancestry instead?

Why do you even care about Warren's ancestry?

Because her political career and academic career were very much dependent on the false claim. She is the one who brought up the issue this week, and her ignorance and misunderstanding of the basic math, statistics and genetics shown in her test result are truly astounding!

It was utterly unconscionable for a Whiter-than-usual-White person to exploit people's good will towards the Cherokee people, who have more than once before told her to stop the pretending.

CBOEtrader says

Also, both she and Harvard were praised for being so deliciously progressive

So what? If a group praised Warren and you think it was unmerited, that is a complaint about the group, not about Warren. You have just made the exact same argument that the SJWs made against Trump, which is that Trump is guilty by association because white supremacists supported him. This is a stupid and disingenuous argument when made by SJWs. It is also a stupid and disingenuous argument when made by you.

The bottom line is that Warren clearly and unequivocally did not lie when she checked off that box. So all complaints against her about this issue is pure identity politics bullshit. And it's obviously so to the vast majority of the American population.

I'm tired of identity politics and wedge issues, and yes, you and the other posters are every bit as guilty of engaging in identity politics as feminists, anti-fa, and black lives matter are. You need to put this bullshit aside because it's tearing apart America and making policy discussions impossible.

I can tell from your posts that you strongly support Trump, someone who has been caught an absurd number of times in lies about ridiculous claims. You clearly have absolutely no problem with a pathological liar as long as he's on your team. Yet you demonize anyone on the other team with transparently false accusations of lying decades ago about a question that should never be on a job application to begin with and is irrelevant to anything today. And the person you are demonizing is a fiscal conservative who's economic policies are perfectly in line with Republican policies from 1854 to 1990. Hell, she was even a Republican voter before the party was taken over by extremists who have abandoned all fiscal responsibility.

Can you really not see how ridiculous all the right wing posts in this thread sounds to normal people? Can you not see how you drive anyone who isn't an extremist out of your party?

doik says

So what? If a group praised Warren and you think it was unmerited, that is a complaint about the group, not about Warren.

Warren committed fraud when checking that box and claimed her mother was discriminated against for being Native American. Given the genetic test result, it was not possible for her mother to have been discriminated against for being Native American. The photos of her mother show no sign of being Native American; her relatives, those who are willing to speak out, had no inkling about what "Native American" talk in the family she was referring to.

www.youtube.com/embed/w5F_AhciUy4

doik says

Why do you even care about Warren's ancestry?

Because SHE and her ilk have made it an issue. Sure, her ancestry should not matter in a fair and just society. But proving her obviously made-up claims of victim hood wrong is just low-hanging fruit for the overall argument that she’s full of shit when she goes on with her divisive identity politics!

Reality says

Warren committed fraud when checking that box and claimed her mother was discriminated against for being Native American. Given the genetic test result, it was not possible for her mother to have been discriminated against for being Native American. The photos of her mother show no sign of being Native American; her relatives, those who are willing to speak out, had no inkling about what "Native American" talk in the family she was referring to.

Reality says

Because her political career and academic career were very much dependent on the false claim. She is the one who brought up the issue this week, and her ignorance and misunderstanding of the basic math, statistics and genetics shown in her test result are truly astounding!

It was utterly unconscionable for a Whiter-than-usual-White person to exploit people's good will towards the Cherokee people, who have more than once before told her to stop the pretending.

One more time, if Warren was goosed by some family stories of Native American oppression then so be it. It was a mistake in the past.

On the other shoe, since Harvard Law School requires a prestigious pedigree then here's the compensation ... Liz would have to attend a post-graduate law program (LLM) at Harvard, Yale, Stanford, Columbia. Chicago, London, Oxford, or Cambridge, graduating with First Class Honours, with a publication of merit.

If she accomplishes the above, then she can stay at Harvard, otherwise, she's fired!

Lindsey Graham to take DNA test to find Native American roots: 'I think I can beat' Elizabeth Warren

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/lindsey-graham-to-take-dna-test-to-find-native-american-roots-i-think-i-can-beat-elizabeth-warren

Reality says

Warren committed fraud when checking that box and claimed her mother was discriminated against for being Native American.

This is a completely unfounded attack. You are grasping at straws. The fact that you would even try such an argument shows how out-of-touch with reality you are. You don't even realize how unpersuasive this argument is to anyone who isn't part of your extremist ideology.

Quigley says

Because SHE and her ilk have made it an issue.

No, they did not. Republicans have use this fake news as a wedge issue. It has on basis in reality and other than refuting the false allegations neither Warren nor the Democrats have at all made this an issue.

Your statement is simply false. Do you really think that you are fooling anybody with such ridiculous statements? I guarantee you that no person has said, geeze I did think that Warren was honest but you made a good point. I'll oppose her and her policies now.

No one is going to say that. No one is going to be persuaded to anything except that you and those making such arguments are so out-of-touch with reality that your opinions and so-called facts are completely untrustworthy.

No one is going to view a freaking Harvard economy professor, fiscal conservative, champaign of the middle class, and proponent of banking reform to be some conniving, evil mastermind stealing those sweet Affirmative Action dollars. It's a ludicrous image, and anyone making such a case just looks like a fool.

Reality says

Because her political career and academic career were very much dependent on the false claim.

This is another unfounded assertion and is entirely irrelevant to her abilities as a senator and the validity of the policies she advocates. Furthermore, the DNA evidence proves beyond any reasonable doubt that the claim was not false. You do not have the right to insert false statements as facts. Reality is objective and evidence is the ultimate test.

Reality says

It was utterly unconscionable for a Whiter-than-usual-White person to exploit people's good will towards the Cherokee people, who have more than once before told her to stop the pretending.

This is a transparent straw man argument and you are obviously disingenuous in making it. You don't give a rat's ass about the Cherokee people and are simply trying to demonize a political opponent no matter how weak your case is. If Warren were a member of Trump's cabinet, and nothing else about her or her history changed, then you would be attacking any Democrat who questioned her integrity or made the very argument you are making. The hypocrisy is painfully obvious.

Reality says

Now you are talking like a Neo-Nazi racial purist.

Godwin's law. You have demonstrated exactly how crazy you are and how destructive your extremist ideology is. No rational conversation can take place when you accuse your opponent of being a Nazi. It's an absurd claim that shows how divorced from reality you are. Did you pick your username ironically?

My main point in this thread is that this stupid echo chamber you (that's everybody here) have built so divorces you from the real world that you cannot even have a normal conversation with normal people about politics. If you were to say any of the shit in this thread in the supermarket to passersbys, they would look at you like you're a crazy tin-foil hat idiot. But you've been inside a crazy echo chamber for so long, you don't even realize how abnormal your speech is. It's like your Overton window has shifted into looneyville.

If you don't believe me, try actually repeating your arguments to strangers in the real world someplace where all people go like the supermarket. Notice how they look at you and how they try to end the conversation and physically move away from you. An internet echo chamber is not the real world, and its warping your sense of reality.

I mean, I literally cannot have a rational discussion with the people in this thread, and I'm as close to your politics as people in the real world will get. But it's like talking to a wall. You guys are acting like you're in a cult. Has politics become a cult? This is not good for our country. Are you all beyond hope? Are you so far gone that you cannot even entertain reality? How did you even get to this point? It's scary. It's scary in the exact same way that the purple-hair feminist man hater is scary.

Patrick, surely you can bring some sanity to these people. You see that this is all identity politics, right?

Sorry doik, but her level of native American blood is in the margin of error. This makes her a deranged liar which most normal people already knew. She is insane.

1/1024 is genetic SPECULATION, she is European.

It's fun to watch libbies gaslight equal opportunity gross fraud on the basis of the tiniest shred of dubious genetic attribution. Callng crazy sane and sane crazy again.

Ceffer says

It's fun to watch libbies gaslight equal opportunity gross fraud on the basis of the tiniest shred of dubious genetic attribution. Callng crazy sane and sane crazy again.

No different than the whole gender confusion myth they are pushing as well.

doik says

Reality says

Warren committed fraud when checking that box and claimed her mother was discriminated against for being Native American.

This is a completely unfounded attack. You are grasping at straws. The fact that you would even try such an argument shows how out-of-touch with reality you are. You don't even realize how unpersuasive this argument is to anyone who isn't part of your extremist ideology.

Actually doik, it's you doesn't know reality. Sure, Liz's mom probably exaggerated stuff in terms of family lore, I mean c'mon, didn't everyone have someone in their family who embellished WWI or WWII stories for the sonic effects? Or perhaps, if you're from an even older world family, some massacre in Eastern European involving Cossacks and Turks?

But still, it doesn't change to most important fact ... NO ONE can be a professor at HARVARD LAW SCHOOL with a JD from RUTGERS!

Really, it's that simple!

Her resume needs to read as follows ...

PhD, Oxford <--- nice to have, but not necessary
LLM, Columbia
JD, Rutgers

Liz doesn't have the above.

Reality says

she would never have qualified as a law professor at Harvard Law School without that "color" card

The type of color matters as Jeannie Suk ...

is Korean-American but has the following ...

PhD, Oxford
JD, Harvard
BA, Yale

Since all Asians are overrepresented in academia, she needed both the numbers and the pedigree to qualify for an HLS position.

joshuatrio says

Sorry doik, but her level of native American blood is in the margin of error. This makes her a deranged liar which most normal people already knew. She is insane.

1/1024 is genetic SPECULATION, she is European.

Your statements are ridiculous. One can easily argue that Trump is a deranged liar, but there is absolutely no evidence to support such a statement against Warren. Nor is it at all reasonable to call her insane. No normal person would consider such a claim to be credible. Finally, being European and Native American isn't mutually exclusive.

Put simply, there is no evidence you would accept that Warren is distantly descendant from Native American. Evidence is irrelevant to people who engage in identity politics.

Ceffer says

It's fun to watch libbies gaslight equal opportunity gross fraud on the basis of the tiniest shred of dubious genetic attribution.

How am I a liberal when I
- support strong borders
- oppose welfare
- favor massive tax cuts
- favor massive spending cuts
- oppose deficit spending
- oppose immigration
- am anti-feminist
- am anti-anti-fa

I'm what Republicans used to be before the party was taken over by crazy extremists, and so is Elizabeth Warren. So now any moderate is a crazy libby to you. Can you see how this makes you the crazy one?

Rin says

NO ONE can be a professor at HARVARD LAW SCHOOL with a JD from RUTGERS!

You are making an assertion. You were not at the job interview. You have no idea why she was hired and who else applied. You cannot know these things.

In any case, she's been a senator long enough that she can be judged on her policies and voting record rather than by some proxy. Again, how is her ancestry relevant to her position as a senator today?

doik says

Put simply, there is no evidence you would accept that Warren is distantly descendant from Native American.

Her claim was that grandpa had high cheek bones and mom was discriminated against, and she was therefore enough native to check it on an application in which she knew it would help her.

Noone would give a shit if she said, "somewhere back there we all have a common ancestor."

Pretending Warren is anything besides factually wrong is insanity.

Being wrong doesnt make you a liar, but when you look at the opportunity to pull a quick one and her total lack of any evidence of Indian heritage, the evidence suggests she knew she was lying.

doik says

Again, how is her ancestry relevant to her position as a senator today?

Lol dude she made this political piece yesterday w intent to (now knowingly) manipulate people by pretending she is part american indian.

Normal people are just laughing at her, and at the fools who eat up her lies.

Rin says

doik says

Reality says

Warren committed fraud when checking that box and claimed her mother was discriminated against for being Native American.

This is a completely unfounded attack. You are grasping at straws. The fact that you would even try such an argument shows how out-of-touch with reality you are. You don't even realize how unpersuasive this argument is to anyone who isn't part of your extremist ideology.

Actually doik, it's you doesn't know reality. Sure, Liz's mom probably exaggerated stuff in terms of family lore, I mean c'mon, didn't everyone have someone in their family who embellished WWI or WWII stories for the sonic effects? Or perhaps, if you're from an even older world family, some massacre in Eastern European involving Cossacks and Turks?

But still, it doesn't change to mos...

Many of us lie when we are young to get our foot in. There is nothing wrong in it.
The problem is she does not want to own up to that mistake. Isn't asking for forgiveness easy than piling on lies?
And the reason she does not want to do that is because liberals cant accept that some people make mistakes when they are young. And they dont have to put them on cross for all simple lies.

doik says

I agree that anyone with a single ancestor from an ethic group, by definition, has that ethnicity as part of their genetic makeup and therefore absolutely is honest in checking the checkbox for that ethnic group whether or not they identity culturally with that group.

Unfortunately, that has palpable real world consequences, like being bragged about as a minority hire. Nor was Harvard the only time Warren used "Native American" in an application process. It was beneficial to both her and the employer.

What really should happen is no ethnicity questions should ever be asked by an employer, the government, and especially the census. Then there will be no identity warfare, ethnic special interest benefits, less gerrymandering and less divisiveness. Of course, one party in particular profits off of identity - the other does as well, but only in reaction to the pushing of special claims by the primary identitarian party. If that party didn't push, they'd have little to react to.

After for regretting in 20 years, I regret the past 30 years of post Cold War neoliberalism, which was a disaster for 60% of Americans. Much of the deficit revolves around hyper-interventionist wars from Yugoslavia to Iraq, something supported by the Media and the Majority of Both Parties. I'm glad of the shake up to Trade and Foreign Policy. For one, it reveals that punitive tariffs and not putting boots on the ground at the first sneeze won't result in WW3 and the Great Depression.

CBOEtrader says

Being wrong doesnt make you a liar, but when you look at the opportunity to pull a quick one and her total lack of any evidence of Indian heritage, the evidence suggests she knew she was lying.

Exactly. This isn't an "I was mistaken about my ancestry", this is "Science proves I am up to 1/1024th Native American, Orange Douchebag! Hear my War Whoop, Whitey!"

I honestly can't believe Democrats want to argue that a person who is proven by DNA to be 99.999% white is somehow Native American.

But if they have an XY chromosome mix, they can somehow be a "woman".

I don't know if I should laugh, or cry.

Goran_K says

I honestly can't believe Democrats want to argue that a person who is proven by DNA to be 99.999% white is somehow Native American.

But if they have an XY chromosome mix, they can somehow be a "woman".

Goran_K says

I honestly can't believe Democrats want to argue that a person who is proven by DNA to be 99.999% white is somehow Native American.

Ridiculous straw man.
She never claimed she was native American.
She herself didn't know what percent of her ancestry was native Americans until the test.
All she did was believe her parents who told her she had some native American ancestry, and claimed so.

Obviously a capital crime for Trump cultists, whose leader does 10 times worse on a regular basis.

"Indians condemned for demanding Congressional salaries because they are 0.1 percent Elizabeth Warren!"

Heraclitusstudent says

She never claimed she was native American.

That's the point of the question on the application.

She also claims an ancestor in the ad she produced and released this week. Yes you are correct, this is no "weddings and yoga" lie.

Heraclitusstudent says

Trump cultists, whose leader does 10 times worse on a regular basis.

Lol you too? Ok, please show us how trump has lied worse than Elizabeth Pocahontas Warren.

Heraclitusstudent says

She never claimed she was native American.

wtf? So changing her race from "white" to "native american" at Harvard is not "claiming" to be Native American?

What will Democrats think of next? Women can have dicks? Men can have periods?

Oh wait..........

But maybe Heraclitus is right, Warren isn't trying to claim to be native, she only published a book called "Pow Wow Chow: A Collection of Recipes from Families of the Five Civilized Tribes : Cherokee, Chickasaw, Choctaw, Creek and Seminole" and claimed to be native on Harvard promotional materials.

That's all.

doik says

Rin says

NO ONE can be a professor at HARVARD LAW SCHOOL with a JD from RUTGERS!

You are making an assertion. You were not at the job interview. You have no idea why she was hired and who else applied. You cannot know these things.

Of course because I'm don't work for the dean's office, however, I do know those, who're in a position to hire assistant professors at Harvard Law and they've been pretty blunt ... Law Review (or other significant publication history) from Top Tier school, Federal Clerkships, etc, are what gets a person past the first round.

So yes, I have an idea or two about what it takes.

indc says

Many of us lie when we are young to get our foot in. There is nothing wrong in it.

Top Tier School does not include Rutgers, no matter how you stretch it.

In fact, getting a teaching post at HLS is so hard that even Harvard, Yale, or Columbia Law Review students have a tough time getting into the final rounds.

Can we have Jeannie Suk, instead of Liz Warren, since she's also a minority woman but didn't fudge her background to get a teaching gig at Harvard Law?

PhD, Oxford
JD, Harvard
BA, Yale

"Ridiculous straw man.
She never claimed she was native American.
She herself didn't know what percent of her ancestry was native Americans until the test."