Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Elizabeth Warren Glosses Over Native American Controversy in New Book - US News
Her opposition to such transparency can perhaps be understood in the documented fact that in the years thereafter, starting in 1986, Warren began self-reporting herself as a "minority professor" in the Association of American Law Schools staff directory that lists all law school professors around the country. As the former association chairman told the Boston Herald, the directory once served a tip sheet for law school administrators, in the pre-Internet days, who were looking to identify and recruit minority professors.
Remarkably, Warren's explanation to the Boston Herald was that she listed herself as a minority in the hopes that she would be invited to a luncheon so she could meet "people who are like I am" and she stopped checking the box when that didn't happen. Perhaps it "didn't happen" because at no point, at any of the schools she attended or worked at, is there any evidence that Warren ever joined any Native American organizations on campus or in any way interacted with anyone in the Native American community.
That did not however, stop Warren from continuing to self-report as a Native American minority. The New York Times reported in May 2012 that Warren was listed as a minority recipient of a teaching award years earlier at the University of Pennsylvania where she had advanced after teaching at several non-Ivy League law schools. Notably, Penn declined to explain to the Times why Warren was listed as a minority.
Because she's a woman maybe? Ya think?
Penn's already on record that they didn't know from Cherokee or any other status when they hired her.
You lose yet again. You're basically the Washington Generals of this thread.
Because she's a woman? WHAAT? Give it up.
You've never heard the old AA phrase "women and minorities"?
Know why they have to be specifically added?
Because y'all are a majority.
Wait -- are you gonna claim she's lying about that too?
Life is so unfair."Lizzy Cheekbones".....
What a racist she is, huh? Thinking that she looks like a native American because of her pointy cheeks. Good Lord.If a person has pointy ears, does that make him or her a vulcan too?
Here, for the denialists -- ALL these people are at least part Cherokee (or in Churchill's case Iroquoi, the parent family):
So tell us all about how Elizabeth Warren can't be Cherokee because she "doesn't look like it".
(Winston Churchill; Della Reese; Elvis Presley; Will Rogers; Burt Reynolds; Cher; Carmen Electra; Richard Dean Anderson; Rosa Parks)
You aren't real bright are you?
Anyone can "claim" anything they want but that doesn't male it so.
There is nothing traceable to prove her claim, professional geaneologists have tried.
Now run along and be a good boy.
Elizabeth Warren Glosses Over Native American Controversy in New Book - US News
Her opposition to such transparency can perhaps be understood in the documented fact that in the years thereafter, starting in 1986, Warren began self-reporting herself as a "minority professor" in the Association of American Law Schools staff directory that lists all law school professors around the country. As the former association chairman told the Boston Herald, the directory once served a tip sheet for law school administrators, in the pre-Internet days, who were looking to identify and recruit minority professors.
Remarkably, Warren's explanation to the Boston Herald was that she listed herself as a minority in the hopes that she would be invited to a luncheon so she could meet "people who are like I am" and she stopped checking the box when that didn't happen. Perhaps it "didn't happen" because at no point, at any of the schools she attended or worked at, is there any evidence that Warren ever joined any Native American organizations on campus or in any way interacted with anyone in the Native American community.
That did not however, stop Warren from continuing to self-report as a Native American minority. The New York Times reported in May 2012 that Warren was listed as a minority recipient of a teaching award years earlier at the University of Pennsylvania where she had advanced after teaching at several non-Ivy League law schools. Notably, Penn declined to explain to the Times why Warren was listed as a minority.
Because she's a woman maybe? Ya think?
Penn's already on record that they didn't know from Cherokee or any other status when they hired her.
You lose yet again. You're basically the Washington Generals of this thread.
Because she's a woman? WHAAT? Give it up.
You've never heard the old AA phrase "women and minorities"?
Know why they have to be specifically added?
Because y'all are a majority.
Wait -- are you gonna claim she's lying about that too?
You dummy, you don't get any special minority status for being a woman. I've filled out college applications before and NOT as a "minority." Get real.
I know that I was passed over for at least two jobs in favor of women. They told me straight out, "you were the most qualified but we had to hire a woman". That real enough?
We don't get any affirmative action perks.Elizabeth Warren Glosses Over Native American Controversy in New Book - US News
Her opposition to such transparency can perhaps be understood in the documented fact that in the years thereafter, starting in 1986, Warren began self-reporting herself as a "minority professor" in the Association of American Law Schools staff directory that lists all law school professors around the country. As the former association chairman told the Boston Herald, the directory once served a tip sheet for law school administrators, in the pre-Internet days, who were looking to identify and recruit minority professors.
Remarkably, Warren's explanation to the Boston Herald was that she listed herself as a minority in the hopes that she would be invited to a luncheon so she could meet "people who are like I am" and she stopped checking the box when that didn't happen. Perhaps it "didn't happen" because at no point, at any of the schools she attended or worked at, is there any evidence that Warren ever joined any Native American organizations on campus or in any way interacted with anyone in the Native American community.
That did not however, stop Warren from continuing to self-report as a Native American minority. The New York Times reported in May 2012 that Warren was listed as a minority recipient of a teaching award years earlier at the University of Pennsylvania where she had advanced after teaching at several non-Ivy League law schools. Notably, Penn declined to explain to the Times why Warren was listed as a minority.
Because she's a woman maybe? Ya think?
Penn's already on record that they didn't know from Cherokee or any other status when they hired her.
You lose yet again. You're basically the Washington Generals of this thread.
Because she's a woman? WHAAT? Give it up.
You've never heard the old AA phrase "women and minorities"?
Know why they have to be specifically added?
Because y'all are a majority.
Wait -- are you gonna claim she's lying about that too?
Does that mean I can claim minority status for being a princess? Daddy said I was a princess, and there really aren't very many princesses in the world. I'm sure plenty of people are discriminatory against princesses too.
Because she's a woman maybe? Ya think?
Penn's already on record that they didn't know from Cherokee or any other status when they hired her.
You lose yet again. You're basically the Washington Generals of this thread.
Because she's a woman? WHAAT? Give it up.
You've never heard the old AA phrase "women and minorities"?
Know why they have to be specifically added?
Because y'all are a majority.
Wait -- are you gonna claim she's lying about that too?
You dummy, you don't get any special minority status for being a woman. I've filled out college applications before and NOT as a "minority." Get real.
I know that I was passed over for at least two jobs in favor of women. They told me straight out, "you were the most qualified but we had to hire a woman". That real enough?
I don't care. And that is nothing more than an anecdote.
There is no "women" listed as a minority status on any college applications, or any applications at all for that matter.
Because she's a woman? WHAAT? Give it up.
You've never heard the old AA phrase "women and minorities"?
Know why they have to be specifically added?
Because y'all are a majority.
Wait -- are you gonna claim she's lying about that too?
You dummy, you don't get any special minority status for being a woman. I've filled out college applications before and NOT as a "minority." Get real.
I know that I was passed over for at least two jobs in favor of women. They told me straight out, "you were the most qualified but we had to hire a woman". That real enough?
I don't care. And that is nothing more than an anecdote.
There is no "women" listed as a minority status on any college applications, or any applications at all for that matter.
Da hell you don't.
Elizabeth Warren Glosses Over Native American Controversy in New Book - US News
Her opposition to such transparency can perhaps be understood in the documented fact that in the years thereafter, starting in 1986, Warren began self-reporting herself as a "minority professor" in the Association of American Law Schools staff directory that lists all law school professors around the country. As the former association chairman told the Boston Herald, the directory once served a tip sheet for law school administrators, in the pre-Internet days, who were looking to identify and recruit minority professors.
Remarkably, Warren's explanation to the Boston Herald was that she listed herself as a minority in the hopes that she would be invited to a luncheon so she could meet "people who are like I am" and she stopped checking the box when that didn't happen. Perhaps it "didn't happen" because at no point, at any of the schools she attended or worked at, is there any evidence that Warren ever joined any Native American organizations on campus or in any way interacted with anyone in the Native American community.
That did not however, stop Warren from continuing to self-report as a Native American minority. The New York Times reported in May 2012 that Warren was listed as a minority recipient of a teaching award years earlier at the University of Pennsylvania where she had advanced after teaching at several non-Ivy League law schools. Notably, Penn declined to explain to the Times why Warren was listed as a minority.
Because she's a woman maybe? Ya think?
Penn's already on record that they didn't know from Cherokee or any other status when they hired her.
You lose yet again. You're basically the Washington Generals of this thread.
Because she's a woman? WHAAT? Give it up.
You've never heard the old AA phrase "women and minorities"?
Know why they have to be specifically added?
Because y'all are a majority.
Wait -- are you gonna claim she's lying about that too?
Does that mean I can claim minority status for being a princess? Daddy said I was a princess, and there really aren't very many princesses in the world. I'm sure plenty of people are discriminatory against princesses too.
Maybe you can...
But Warren didn't, as far as anyone has been able to....
what is the word again...
Oh yes -- PROVE.
Because she's a woman maybe? Ya think?
Penn's already on record that they didn't know from Cherokee or any other status when they hired her.
You lose yet again. You're basically the Washington Generals of this thread.
Because she's a woman? WHAAT? Give it up.
You've never heard the old AA phrase "women and minorities"?
Know why they have to be specifically added?
Because y'all are a majority.
Wait -- are you gonna claim she's lying about that too?
Does that mean I can claim minority status for being a princess? Daddy said I was a princess, and there really aren't very many princesses in the world. I'm sure plenty of people are discriminatory against princesses too.
Maybe you can...
But Warren didn't, as far as anyone has been able to....
what is the word again...
Oh yes -- PROVE.
Yes she did. The proof is in the links.
Because she's a woman? WHAAT? Give it up.
You've never heard the old AA phrase "women and minorities"?
Know why they have to be specifically added?
Because y'all are a majority.
Wait -- are you gonna claim she's lying about that too?
Does that mean I can claim minority status for being a princess? Daddy said I was a princess, and there really aren't very many princesses in the world. I'm sure plenty of people are discriminatory against princesses too.
Maybe you can...
But Warren didn't, as far as anyone has been able to....
what is the word again...
Oh yes -- PROVE.
Yes she did. The proof is in the links.
Funny how you can't quote them then.
That's always the problem with things that don't exist. Ya try to cut and paste, nothin' shows up.
Because she's a woman? WHAAT? Give it up.
You've never heard the old AA phrase "women and minorities"?
Know why they have to be specifically added?
Because y'all are a majority.
Wait -- are you gonna claim she's lying about that too?
You dummy, you don't get any special minority status for being a woman. I've filled out college applications before and NOT as a "minority." Get real.
I know that I was passed over for at least two jobs in favor of women. They told me straight out, "you were the most qualified but we had to hire a woman". That real enough?
I don't care. And that is nothing more than an anecdote.
There is no "women" listed as a minority status on any college applications, or any applications at all for that matter.
Da hell you don't.
In the United States, affirmative action refers to equal opportunity employment measures that Federal contractors and subcontractors are legally required to adopt. These measures are intended to prevent discrimination against employees or applicants for employment on the basis of "color, religion, sex, or national origin".[1][2] Examples of affirmative action offered by the United States Department of Labor include outreach campaigns, targeted recruitment, employee and management development, and employee support programs.[2]
The impetus toward affirmative action is to redress the disadvantages[3][4][5][6][7] associated with overt historical discrimination.[8] Further impetus is a desire to ensure public institutions, such as universities, hospitals, and police forces, are more representative of the populations they serve.[9] Affirmative action is a subject of controversy. Some policies adopted as affirmative action, such as racial quotas or gender quotas for collegiate admission, have been criticized as a form of reverse discrimination, and such implementation of affirmative action has been ruled unconstitutional by the majority opinion of Gratz v. Bollinger. Affirmative action as a practice was upheld by the court's decision in Grutter v. Bollinger.[10]
(Wiki)
Because she's a woman? WHAAT? Give it up.
You've never heard the old AA phrase "women and minorities"?
Know why they have to be specifically added?
Because y'all are a majority.
Wait -- are you gonna claim she's lying about that too?
You dummy, you don't get any special minority status for being a woman. I've filled out college applications before and NOT as a "minority." Get real.
I know that I was passed over for at least two jobs in favor of women. They told me straight out, "you were the most qualified but we had to hire a woman". That real enough?
I don't care. And that is nothing more than an anecdote.
There is no "women" listed as a minority status on any college applications, or any applications at all for that matter.
Da hell you don't.
In the United States, affirmative action refers to equal opportunity employment measures that Federal contractors and subcontractors are legally required to adopt. These measures are intended to prevent discrimination against employees or applicants for employment on the basis of "color, religion, sex, or national origin".[1][2] Examples of affirmative action offered by the United States Department of Labor include outreach campaigns, targeted recruitment, employee and management development, and employee support programs.[2]
The impetus toward affirmative action is to redress the disadvantages[3][4][5][6][7] associated with overt historical discrimination.[8] Further impetus is a desire to ensure public institutions, such as universities, hospitals, and police forces, are more representative of the populations they serve.[9] Affirmative action is a subject of controversy. Some policies adopted as affirmative action, such as racial quotas or gender quotas for collegiate admission, have been criticized as a form of reverse discrimination, and such implementation of affirmative action has been ruled unconstitutional by the majority opinion of Gratz v. Bollinger. Affirmative action as a practice was upheld by the court's decision in Grutter v. Bollinger.[10]
(Wiki)
What a racist she is, huh? Thinking that she looks like a native American because of her pointy cheeks. Good Lord.
Here, for the denialists -- ALL these people are at least part Cherokee (or Iroquoi, the parent family):
So tell us all about how Elizabeth Warren can't be Cherokee because she "doesn't look like it".
"The Great Grandparents
John Houston Crawford, the great grandfather of Ms. Warren, was the son of Preston H. Crawford and Edith May "Ede" Marsh. He was born in Laclede County, Missouri, on March 26, 1858. He was found on the 1860 US Census as John H. Crauford, living in Hooker, Laclede County, Missouri, with his parents and siblings; race listed as white. He was found on the 1870 US Census living in Hooker, Laclede County, Missouri, with his father and siblings; race listed as white. He was found on the 1880 US Census as JH Crawford, living in Grant, Johnson County, Arkansas with his wife, children and a farm laboror; race listed as white. He was found on the 1900 US Census as John H. Crofford, living in Township 12, CherokeeNation, Indian Territory with his children- RENTS; race listed as white,found on the regular census schedule, not the Special Schedule for Indians. He married Sarah E. Smith on September 2, 1904 in Laclede County, Missouri. He was found on the 1910 US Census listed as JH Crowford, living in Wetumka Ward 4, Hughes County, Oklahoma with his wife, two of his children and a step-daughter; race listed as white. He died January 23, 1924 and was buried in Wetumka Cemetery in Wetumka, Hughes County, Oklahoma.
Read more: Thoughts from Polly s Granddaughter Elizabeth Warren s Ancestry - Part 1
And what "race" would Della Reese be listed under, Frank? How 'bout Churchill? Cher?
Bill Clinton? Kevin Costner?
Mark Farner (Grand Funk Railroad)?
Or how 'bout this lady from right here in my area:
What "race", Frank? They're all Cherokee.
But not Elizabeth. I'll bet all of THOSE people have other such documentation to verify their heritage other than "stories from my mother."
Doesn't matter --- they don't need it. YOU do. Your quest is the negative. That's what you need in your hand when you declare something does not exist. Which is the corner you paint yourself into when you go "she lied".
Here, for the denialists -- ALL these people are at least part Cherokee (or Iroquoi, the parent family):
So tell us all about how Elizabeth Warren can't be Cherokee because she "doesn't look like it".
"The Great Grandparents
John Houston Crawford, the great grandfather of Ms. Warren, was the son of Preston H. Crawford and Edith May "Ede" Marsh. He was born in Laclede County, Missouri, on March 26, 1858. He was found on the 1860 US Census as John H. Crauford, living in Hooker, Laclede County, Missouri, with his parents and siblings; race listed as white. He was found on the 1870 US Census living in Hooker, Laclede County, Missouri, with his father and siblings; race listed as white. He was found on the 1880 US Census as JH Crawford, living in Grant, Johnson County, Arkansas with his wife, children and a farm laboror; race listed as white. He was found on the 1900 US Census as John H. Crofford, living in Township 12, CherokeeNation, Indian Territory with his children- RENTS; race listed as white,found on the regular census schedule, not the Special Schedule for Indians. He married Sarah E. Smith on September 2, 1904 in Laclede County, Missouri. He was found on the 1910 US Census listed as JH Crowford, living in Wetumka Ward 4, Hughes County, Oklahoma with his wife, two of his children and a step-daughter; race listed as white. He died January 23, 1924 and was buried in Wetumka Cemetery in Wetumka, Hughes County, Oklahoma.
Read more: Thoughts from Polly s Granddaughter Elizabeth Warren s Ancestry - Part 1
And what "race" would Della Reese be listed under, Frank? How 'bout Churchill? Cher?
Bill Clinton? Kevin Costner?
Mark Farner (Grand Funk Railroad)?
Or how 'bout this lady from right here in my area:
What "race", Frank? They're all Cherokee.
But not Elizabeth. I'll bet all of THOSE people have other such documentation to verify their heritage other than "stories from my mother."
Doesn't matter --- they don't need it. YOU do. Your quest is the negative. That's what you need in your hand when you declare something does not exist. Which is the corner you paint yourself into when you go "she lied".
Nope, we aren't required to prove a negative. If Fauxahontas can't domenostrate any Indian heritage, then no one is required to believe she has any.
No wonder you believe in global warming. You have no understanding of logic.
"The Great Grandparents
John Houston Crawford, the great grandfather of Ms. Warren, was the son of Preston H. Crawford and Edith May "Ede" Marsh. He was born in Laclede County, Missouri, on March 26, 1858. He was found on the 1860 US Census as John H. Crauford, living in Hooker, Laclede County, Missouri, with his parents and siblings; race listed as white. He was found on the 1870 US Census living in Hooker, Laclede County, Missouri, with his father and siblings; race listed as white. He was found on the 1880 US Census as JH Crawford, living in Grant, Johnson County, Arkansas with his wife, children and a farm laboror; race listed as white. He was found on the 1900 US Census as John H. Crofford, living in Township 12, CherokeeNation, Indian Territory with his children- RENTS; race listed as white,found on the regular census schedule, not the Special Schedule for Indians. He married Sarah E. Smith on September 2, 1904 in Laclede County, Missouri. He was found on the 1910 US Census listed as JH Crowford, living in Wetumka Ward 4, Hughes County, Oklahoma with his wife, two of his children and a step-daughter; race listed as white. He died January 23, 1924 and was buried in Wetumka Cemetery in Wetumka, Hughes County, Oklahoma.
Read more: Thoughts from Polly s Granddaughter Elizabeth Warren s Ancestry - Part 1
And what "race" would Della Reese be listed under, Frank? How 'bout Churchill? Cher?
Bill Clinton? Kevin Costner?
Mark Farner (Grand Funk Railroad)?
Or how 'bout this lady from right here in my area:
What "race", Frank? They're all Cherokee.
But not Elizabeth. I'll bet all of THOSE people have other such documentation to verify their heritage other than "stories from my mother."
Doesn't matter --- they don't need it. YOU do. Your quest is the negative. That's what you need in your hand when you declare something does not exist. Which is the corner you paint yourself into when you go "she lied".
Nope, we aren't required to prove a negative. If Fauxahontas can't domenostrate any Indian heritage, then no one is required to believe she has any.
That much is true. But that's not the issue.
What these clowns keep assertting is "she lied". In order for that to be true it has to be proven that (a) she has no N-Am blood and (b) knows that.
That's exactly what they can't show. Either one. So yes, proving a negative is exactly the task. Because the negative was asserted.
Matter of fact we have that genealogist with the document from 1894 for the former and her siblings recounting the same family history for the latter, so they've both been shot down in flames.
Yet they go on. No one knows why.
It's even been suggested they know because "she doesn't look like one" which recalls the onty Python witch scene and is the reason for that bunch of pictures above.
Yet they plug on. No one knows why.
No wonder you believe in global warming. You have no understanding of logic.
I believe I just demonstrated where the logical chasm is.
Oh and you're welcome to quote these posts of mine on "global warming" speaking of things that don't exist..
"The Great Grandparents
John Houston Crawford, the great grandfather of Ms. Warren, was the son of Preston H. Crawford and Edith May "Ede" Marsh. He was born in Laclede County, Missouri, on March 26, 1858. He was found on the 1860 US Census as John H. Crauford, living in Hooker, Laclede County, Missouri, with his parents and siblings; race listed as white. He was found on the 1870 US Census living in Hooker, Laclede County, Missouri, with his father and siblings; race listed as white. He was found on the 1880 US Census as JH Crawford, living in Grant, Johnson County, Arkansas with his wife, children and a farm laboror; race listed as white. He was found on the 1900 US Census as John H. Crofford, living in Township 12, CherokeeNation, Indian Territory with his children- RENTS; race listed as white,found on the regular census schedule, not the Special Schedule for Indians. He married Sarah E. Smith on September 2, 1904 in Laclede County, Missouri. He was found on the 1910 US Census listed as JH Crowford, living in Wetumka Ward 4, Hughes County, Oklahoma with his wife, two of his children and a step-daughter; race listed as white. He died January 23, 1924 and was buried in Wetumka Cemetery in Wetumka, Hughes County, Oklahoma.
Read more: Thoughts from Polly s Granddaughter Elizabeth Warren s Ancestry - Part 1
And what "race" would Della Reese be listed under, Frank? How 'bout Churchill? Cher?
Bill Clinton? Kevin Costner?
Mark Farner (Grand Funk Railroad)?
Or how 'bout this lady from right here in my area:
What "race", Frank? They're all Cherokee.
But not Elizabeth. I'll bet all of THOSE people have other such documentation to verify their heritage other than "stories from my mother."
Doesn't matter --- they don't need it. YOU do. Your quest is the negative. That's what you need in your hand when you declare something does not exist. Which is the corner you paint yourself into when you go "she lied".
Nope, we aren't required to prove a negative. If Fauxahontas can't domenostrate any Indian heritage, then no one is required to believe she has any.
That much is true. But that's not the issue.
What these clowns keep assertting is "she lied". In order for that to be true it has to be proven that (a) she has no N-Am blood and (b) knows that.
That's exactly what they can't show. Either one. So yes, proving a negative is exactly the task. Because the negative was asserted.
Matter of fact we have that genealogist with the document from 1894 for the former and her siblings recounting the same family history for the latter, so they've both been shot down in flames.
Yet they go on. No one knows why.
It's even been suggested they know because "she doesn't look like one" which recalls the onty Python witch scene and is the reason for that bunch of pictures above.
Yet they plug on. No one knows why.
No wonder you believe in global warming. You have no understanding of logic.
I believe I just demonstrated where the logical chasm is.
Oh and you're welcome to quote these posts of mine on "global warming" speaking of things that don't exist..
And what "race" would Della Reese be listed under, Frank? How 'bout Churchill? Cher?
Bill Clinton? Kevin Costner?
Mark Farner (Grand Funk Railroad)?
Or how 'bout this lady from right here in my area:
What "race", Frank? They're all Cherokee.
But not Elizabeth. I'll bet all of THOSE people have other such documentation to verify their heritage other than "stories from my mother."
Doesn't matter --- they don't need it. YOU do. Your quest is the negative. That's what you need in your hand when you declare something does not exist. Which is the corner you paint yourself into when you go "she lied".
Nope, we aren't required to prove a negative. If Fauxahontas can't domenostrate any Indian heritage, then no one is required to believe she has any.
That much is true. But that's not the issue.
What these clowns keep assertting is "she lied". In order for that to be true it has to be proven that (a) she has no N-Am blood and (b) knows that.
That's exactly what they can't show. Either one. So yes, proving a negative is exactly the task. Because the negative was asserted.
Matter of fact we have that genealogist with the document from 1894 for the former and her siblings recounting the same family history for the latter, so they've both been shot down in flames.
Yet they go on. No one knows why.
It's even been suggested they know because "she doesn't look like one" which recalls the onty Python witch scene and is the reason for that bunch of pictures above.
Yet they plug on. No one knows why.
No wonder you believe in global warming. You have no understanding of logic.
I believe I just demonstrated where the logical chasm is.
Oh and you're welcome to quote these posts of mine on "global warming" speaking of things that don't exist..
It's also obvious by the numerous links that I and others have posted that she is dishonest. It doesn't take a rocket surgeon to figure that out.
And what "race" would Della Reese be listed under, Frank? How 'bout Churchill? Cher?
Bill Clinton? Kevin Costner?
Mark Farner (Grand Funk Railroad)?
Or how 'bout this lady from right here in my area:
What "race", Frank? They're all Cherokee.
But not Elizabeth. I'll bet all of THOSE people have other such documentation to verify their heritage other than "stories from my mother."
Doesn't matter --- they don't need it. YOU do. Your quest is the negative. That's what you need in your hand when you declare something does not exist. Which is the corner you paint yourself into when you go "she lied".
Nope, we aren't required to prove a negative. If Fauxahontas can't domenostrate any Indian heritage, then no one is required to believe she has any.
That much is true. But that's not the issue.
What these clowns keep assertting is "she lied". In order for that to be true it has to be proven that (a) she has no N-Am blood and (b) knows that.
That's exactly what they can't show. Either one. So yes, proving a negative is exactly the task. Because the negative was asserted.
Matter of fact we have that genealogist with the document from 1894 for the former and her siblings recounting the same family history for the latter, so they've both been shot down in flames.
Yet they go on. No one knows why.
It's even been suggested they know because "she doesn't look like one" which recalls the onty Python witch scene and is the reason for that bunch of pictures above.
Yet they plug on. No one knows why.
No wonder you believe in global warming. You have no understanding of logic.
I believe I just demonstrated where the logical chasm is.
Oh and you're welcome to quote these posts of mine on "global warming" speaking of things that don't exist..
Well, she applied as a native American. Therefore, she is either really, really stupid, or she is dishonest. Which one?
You've never heard the old AA phrase "women and minorities"?
Know why they have to be specifically added?
Because y'all are a majority.
Wait -- are you gonna claim she's lying about that too?
Does that mean I can claim minority status for being a princess? Daddy said I was a princess, and there really aren't very many princesses in the world. I'm sure plenty of people are discriminatory against princesses too.
Maybe you can...
But Warren didn't, as far as anyone has been able to....
what is the word again...
Oh yes -- PROVE.
Yes she did. The proof is in the links.
Funny how you can't quote them then.
That's always the problem with things that don't exist. Ya try to cut and paste, nothin' shows up.
I've already done that multiple times throughout the thread, but like Beaky Buzzard, you just keep saying, nope, nope, nope. Lol.
But not Elizabeth. I'll bet all of THOSE people have other such documentation to verify their heritage other than "stories from my mother."
Doesn't matter --- they don't need it. YOU do. Your quest is the negative. That's what you need in your hand when you declare something does not exist. Which is the corner you paint yourself into when you go "she lied".
Nope, we aren't required to prove a negative. If Fauxahontas can't domenostrate any Indian heritage, then no one is required to believe she has any.
That much is true. But that's not the issue.
What these clowns keep assertting is "she lied". In order for that to be true it has to be proven that (a) she has no N-Am blood and (b) knows that.
That's exactly what they can't show. Either one. So yes, proving a negative is exactly the task. Because the negative was asserted.
Matter of fact we have that genealogist with the document from 1894 for the former and her siblings recounting the same family history for the latter, so they've both been shot down in flames.
Yet they go on. No one knows why.
It's even been suggested they know because "she doesn't look like one" which recalls the onty Python witch scene and is the reason for that bunch of pictures above.
Yet they plug on. No one knows why.
No wonder you believe in global warming. You have no understanding of logic.
I believe I just demonstrated where the logical chasm is.
Oh and you're welcome to quote these posts of mine on "global warming" speaking of things that don't exist..
It's also obvious by the numerous links that I and others have posted that she is dishonest. It doesn't take a rocket surgeon to figure that out.
Ah, taking the Dante approach -- speaking in the third person. That's always fun.
