Scott Brown: Elizabeth Warren Should Do DNA Test To Prove Her Native American Heritage (Libs Livid)

[Pogo]

Link it then. And explain why any Native American tribe ---- let alone "several" ---- would be "asking for proof". What do they care?

Hm?


Not a fact either. If it was you could demonstrate it, and you can't.
And again, I don't know about the GGGrandmother but the specific ancestor cited before was a male, named Harry Reed, one of a set of brothers who married sisters. Far as I know Grandmothers, no matter how great they are, are not male.


Warren made no claim here, and certainly doesn't "NEED" to back up jack shit. YOU do. "She lied" is an assertion. And you have nothing behind it but air.

Look it up, lazy, it's in the Atlantic in 2012. I never made the claim Warren was a Native American, she did, let her back it up. In the Harvard registry she claimed she was a Native American, even she doesn't deny that.



Is Elizabeth Warren Native American or What?

There posted it for you, do you think you can go to the link and read it or do we need to do that for you to.

What the friggety fuck dood --- you can't just waltz around claiming something exists, you *NEED* to prove it does. Don't you get it?

I look forward to this. The first line, literally the subheading, reads:

"The Democratic Senate candidate can't back up family lore that she is part Indian -- but neither is there any evidence that she benefited professionally from these stories."







Reading on ---- the article centers on whether Warren would be eligible for membership in Cherokee Nation. There's just one shortcoming with that premise ----- Warren isn't applying for membership in Cherokee Nation. Never did. She simply said it was in her ancestry. That's in no way the same thing -- see the bold below.

Moreover, quoting from the same article:

=> None of this to say that a Cherokee citizen couldn't look like Warren. Though it confounds many people's expectations, the Cherokee Nation considers being Cherokee as much an ethnicity as anything racial, and given the tribe's centuries-long history of intermarriage there are many Cherokee citizens today who do not look stereotypically Native American. As well, "there are a lot of folks who are legitimately Cherokee who are not eligible for citizenship," said Krehbiel-Burton, because, for example, their ancestors lived in distant states or territories when the rolls were drawn up, or because they are direct descendants of people left off the rolls for other reasons. <=​

Plus, it repeats, copiously, the earlier linked evidence that there was specifically no preferential treatment either offered to, or sought by Warren, at Harvard as well as at Rutgers and the University of Texas. Matter of fact this article makes that point more strongly than the PolitiFact link did.

You just dug yourself deeper.

Oh and there's more corroboration of the family stories in my last link that I didn't even quote...

Shows the tribes wanting proof and it shows it was her great great grandmother.

I dug nothing, you cherry pick what you want and don't want to believe. My opinion is she lied and you can believe what you want.

NO. IT. DOES. NOT.
Nowhere in your article is any tribe "wanting proof". Why do you lie when I've got the article right in front of me?

AGAIN ---- why the fuck would "several tribes" --- or any tribes --- "want proof"?? What the fuck do they care?

I don't know why they care but they do, ask them!

Cherokee group challenges Warren

Read your own link. That ain't the Cherokee Nation --- it's, and I quote, "people purporting to be “concerned” members and descendants of three Cherokee tribes"

I can "purport to be" the Queen of Belgium if I want. And you can too.

Further, they are reported as saying, and again I quote, directed to Warren, "it isn’t who you claim, but instead, who claims you".

Well ---- no it ain't. Nobody in the world needs permission from some group of purporters to describe their own heritage and family stories. NOBODY.

The Republic of Ireland has never "claimed" me --- nor does it need to. Have you heard from the government of Italy?

THINK about it.

Pathetic, dood. Burden of proof.

>> Cornsilk, who explained that members of the new group have no intention of getting involved in the politics of the highly anticipated Senate race in Massachusetts, said that if records from Harvard show that Warren’s false claims helped her get a job, the Democratic candidate would owe Cherokees a sincere apology. <<​

It's already been established that no such thing occurred. YOUR OWN LINK from the Atlantic spelled that out profusely. The entire suggestion is loser bullshit rhetoric from a losing political campaign, contrived by a loser who lost.

Moreover your link is FOUR YEARS OLD. All of these questions raised by the loser have long since been addressed.

Yet here you are still trying to sell it.

Pathetic dood.

 

[Pogo]

The Atlantic ran an article in 2012 that certain Native American tribes were asking for proof.

Link it then. And explain why any Native American tribe ---- let alone "several" ---- would be "asking for proof". What do they care?

Hm?

She made a claim she can't back it up. The 1866 census says that The claimed Native American great great grandmother is white. Not my problem that she lied.

Not a fact either. If it was you could demonstrate it, and you can't.
And again, I don't know about the GGGrandmother but the specific ancestor cited before was a male, named Harry Reed, one of a set of brothers who married sisters. Far as I know Grandmothers, no matter how great they are, are not male.

Her claim, she needs to back it up. Not me, you fail!

Warren made no claim here, and certainly doesn't "NEED" to back up jack shit. YOU do. "She lied" is an assertion. And you have nothing behind it but air.

From a page posted the last time you mythologists went "yammer yammer yammer" in denial of what was right in plain sight:

First of all, this is not a "grandmother"

Harry Reed
​

=> As a child growing up in rural Arizona, Ina Mapes remembers her mother as a highly discreet woman who rarely expressed her personal feelings except when it came to one particularly incendiary topic: Did Mapes’s father, a raven-haired lawyer, have Native American roots, or did he not? Mapes’s grandmother maintained that he had one-quarter tribal blood. But her mother wanted to hear nothing of it.

“My mother did not approve of Indians, and she insisted that my father was not an Indian,” said Mapes, 77, of Catalina, Ariz. “In those days, it was not a plus to be an Indian, not at all. She said that Granny, my father’s mother, was just making it up and she did not believe it.”

Mapes, a mother of four who volunteers in a clothing bank, is a second cousin to US Senate candidate Elizabeth Warren. The two women, who have never met, share more DNA than most second cousins: Not only were their grandmothers sisters, their grandfathers were brothers. Those brothers — a team of carpenters named Harry and Everett Reed who plied their trade in the Indian Territory that would become the state of Oklahoma — are believed by some family members to have roots in the Delaware tribe. Mapes, who said she was unaware of her cousin’s candidacy until contacted by a reporter, said she does not doubt her heritage.

“I think you are what you are,” said Mapes. “And part of us is Indian.”

... Born and raised in Arizona, Ina Mapes visited her grandmother and other Reed relatives in Okmulgee, Okla., every summer. Her grandmother, by then widowed, often talked about her son’s Indian blood, which she said he inherited from his father, Everett Reed. While Laura Reed was proud of her son’s heritage, Mapes said, her own mother was distinctly not. Both of the older women would independently harangue young Ina on the topic, in part of their ongoing dispute.

... other descendants of Hannie and Laura — those with a direct connection to the Reed brothers — say they were told stories about their Cherokee and Delaware blood similar to those heard by Warren and her brother. Like their cousins, they never questioned the truth of what they were told and apparently made no attempt to document their roots.​

.... Warren’s family, including cousin Mapes, have no documentation of Native American affiliation, nor is there evidence that they are listed on any official tribal roll. While Senator Scott Brown, Warren’s opponent, has used this to question her truthfulness, many who assert such heritage are unable to document it, according to several scholars. During the late 1800s and early 1900s, many Native Americans did not join tribal rolls for a host of complex reasons, including residency requirements, fear of discrimination, and opposition to land allotment policies.

... David Herring of Norman, Okla., one of Warren’s three brothers, said in an interview that even when he was a child his relatives were reluctant to talk about the family’s Native American heritage because “it was not popular in my family.” Only when he begged his grandparents, said Herring, did they finally explain to him: “Your grandfather is part Delaware, a little bitty bit, way back, and your grandmother is part Cherokee. It was not the most popular thing to do in Oklahoma. [Indians] were degraded, looked down on.”

Both the Reeds and the Crawfords are identified as “white” on federal Census forms in the early 20th century that rely upon self-identification. While that may have been a simple statement of fact, they may also have been trying to obscure their ethnicity. At the time, the federal government was attempting to break up reservations by granting land allotments to individual Native Americans, pressing them to assimilate into white society and leave their tribal ways behind. The goal, as one officer bluntly put it, was to “kill the Indian and save the man.” Those who could pass for white — or convince the census taker that they were — sometimes did.

“If someone was not white, they were a little bit less of a citizen,” said Matt Reed, the curator of the American Indian Collections at the Oklahoma Historical Society in Oklahoma City, whose mother was a Pawnee Indian. “If you had darker skin, you were a lesser human. So, if your skin was light enough to pass as not being Indian, then you just passed as white and your life was a lot better off. A lot more people did that than you might think.” <=

--- Boston.com​

So from this article I count:

• Three siblings;
• Three distant cousins, at least one and possibly all of whom don't know Warren;
• An undetermined number of other cousins;
• And a college friend

--- ALL corroborating the family folklore. Seven-plus people.

You got ............ zero.

Then she should have no problem proving it, oh wait, she can't. Never mind!

She doesn't *NEED* to --- however I just provided you with seven-plus people who corroborate the family lore, which is all it was ever proposed to be.

YOU on the other hand made an assertion of an action, to wit that "she lied". That leaves *YOU* the burden of proof. And that means you have to show that (a) the heritage description was not true *AND* that (b) she knew it was not true. *BOTH* must exist for a "lie'.

You completely *FAILED* to do that, and you're too much of coward to admit you were wrong.

 

[Pogo]

Day 2,574. Number of Warren Indian ancestors is still pinned at zero.

It's possible that the Great great great grandfather of a second cousin was 1/4 Indian. Still not enough for her to declare herself as Indian

Actually it's her own grandfather, directly. I posted his picture above. Go all you like, it's not going away.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Day 2,574. Number of Warren Indian ancestors is still pinned at zero.

It's possible that the Great great great grandfather of a second cousin was 1/4 Indian. Still not enough for her to declare herself as Indian

Actually it's her own grandfather, directly. I posted his picture above. Go all you like, it's not going away.

Harry Reed?

LOL

\Scott Brown: Elizabeth Warren Should Do DNA Test To Prove Her Native American Heritage (Libs Livid)

He's not shown as a Indian anywhere, just another of Squirrely Cheekbones that maybe, according to family legend, with all evidence to the contrary, he was 1/4 Indian.

"All were always found in all records as white.

Generation 2

2. Harry Gunn Reed: born 1 Oct 1872 in Mount Vernon, Jefferson County, Illinois; married 2 Jun 1893 in Sebastian, Arkansas, United States; died 23 Dec 1956 in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma County, Oklahoma."

 

[Papageorgio]

Look it up, lazy, it's in the Atlantic in 2012. I never made the claim Warren was a Native American, she did, let her back it up. In the Harvard registry she claimed she was a Native American, even she doesn't deny that.



Is Elizabeth Warren Native American or What?

There posted it for you, do you think you can go to the link and read it or do we need to do that for you to.

What the friggety fuck dood --- you can't just waltz around claiming something exists, you *NEED* to prove it does. Don't you get it?

I look forward to this. The first line, literally the subheading, reads:

"The Democratic Senate candidate can't back up family lore that she is part Indian -- but neither is there any evidence that she benefited professionally from these stories."







Reading on ---- the article centers on whether Warren would be eligible for membership in Cherokee Nation. There's just one shortcoming with that premise ----- Warren isn't applying for membership in Cherokee Nation. Never did. She simply said it was in her ancestry. That's in no way the same thing -- see the bold below.

Moreover, quoting from the same article:

=> None of this to say that a Cherokee citizen couldn't look like Warren. Though it confounds many people's expectations, the Cherokee Nation considers being Cherokee as much an ethnicity as anything racial, and given the tribe's centuries-long history of intermarriage there are many Cherokee citizens today who do not look stereotypically Native American. As well, "there are a lot of folks who are legitimately Cherokee who are not eligible for citizenship," said Krehbiel-Burton, because, for example, their ancestors lived in distant states or territories when the rolls were drawn up, or because they are direct descendants of people left off the rolls for other reasons. <=​

Plus, it repeats, copiously, the earlier linked evidence that there was specifically no preferential treatment either offered to, or sought by Warren, at Harvard as well as at Rutgers and the University of Texas. Matter of fact this article makes that point more strongly than the PolitiFact link did.

You just dug yourself deeper.

Oh and there's more corroboration of the family stories in my last link that I didn't even quote...

Shows the tribes wanting proof and it shows it was her great great grandmother.

I dug nothing, you cherry pick what you want and don't want to believe. My opinion is she lied and you can believe what you want.

NO. IT. DOES. NOT.
Nowhere in your article is any tribe "wanting proof". Why do you lie when I've got the article right in front of me?

AGAIN ---- why the fuck would "several tribes" --- or any tribes --- "want proof"?? What the fuck do they care?

I don't know why they care but they do, ask them!

Cherokee group challenges Warren

Read your own link. That ain't the Cherokee Nation --- it's, and I quote, "people purporting to be “concerned” members and descendants of three Cherokee tribes"

I can "purport to be" the Queen of Belgium if I want. And you can too.

Further, they are reported as saying, and again I quote, directed to Warren, "it isn’t who you claim, but instead, who claims you".

Well ---- no it ain't. Nobody in the world needs permission from some group of purporters to describe their own heritage and family stories. NOBODY.

The Republic of Ireland has never "claimed" me --- nor does it need to. Have you heard from the government of Italy?

THINK about it.

Pathetic, dood. Burden of proof.

>> Cornsilk, who explained that members of the new group have no intention of getting involved in the politics of the highly anticipated Senate race in Massachusetts, said that if records from Harvard show that Warren’s false claims helped her get a job, the Democratic candidate would owe Cherokees a sincere apology. <<​

It's already been established that no such thing occurred. YOUR OWN LINK from the Atlantic spelled that out profusely. The entire suggestion is loser bullshit rhetoric from a losing political campaign, contrived by a loser who lost.

Moreover your link is FOUR YEARS OLD. All of these questions raised by the loser have long since been addressed.

Yet here you are still trying to sell it.

Pathetic dood.

Interesting opinion, not much else. She lied, that's life. She has no proof, it's over.

 

[Papageorgio]

The Atlantic ran an article in 2012 that certain Native American tribes were asking for proof.

Link it then. And explain why any Native American tribe ---- let alone "several" ---- would be "asking for proof". What do they care?

Hm?

She made a claim she can't back it up. The 1866 census says that The claimed Native American great great grandmother is white. Not my problem that she lied.

Not a fact either. If it was you could demonstrate it, and you can't.
And again, I don't know about the GGGrandmother but the specific ancestor cited before was a male, named Harry Reed, one of a set of brothers who married sisters. Far as I know Grandmothers, no matter how great they are, are not male.

Her claim, she needs to back it up. Not me, you fail!

Warren made no claim here, and certainly doesn't "NEED" to back up jack shit. YOU do. "She lied" is an assertion. And you have nothing behind it but air.

From a page posted the last time you mythologists went "yammer yammer yammer" in denial of what was right in plain sight:

First of all, this is not a "grandmother"

Harry Reed
​

=> As a child growing up in rural Arizona, Ina Mapes remembers her mother as a highly discreet woman who rarely expressed her personal feelings except when it came to one particularly incendiary topic: Did Mapes’s father, a raven-haired lawyer, have Native American roots, or did he not? Mapes’s grandmother maintained that he had one-quarter tribal blood. But her mother wanted to hear nothing of it.

“My mother did not approve of Indians, and she insisted that my father was not an Indian,” said Mapes, 77, of Catalina, Ariz. “In those days, it was not a plus to be an Indian, not at all. She said that Granny, my father’s mother, was just making it up and she did not believe it.”

Mapes, a mother of four who volunteers in a clothing bank, is a second cousin to US Senate candidate Elizabeth Warren. The two women, who have never met, share more DNA than most second cousins: Not only were their grandmothers sisters, their grandfathers were brothers. Those brothers — a team of carpenters named Harry and Everett Reed who plied their trade in the Indian Territory that would become the state of Oklahoma — are believed by some family members to have roots in the Delaware tribe. Mapes, who said she was unaware of her cousin’s candidacy until contacted by a reporter, said she does not doubt her heritage.

“I think you are what you are,” said Mapes. “And part of us is Indian.”

... Born and raised in Arizona, Ina Mapes visited her grandmother and other Reed relatives in Okmulgee, Okla., every summer. Her grandmother, by then widowed, often talked about her son’s Indian blood, which she said he inherited from his father, Everett Reed. While Laura Reed was proud of her son’s heritage, Mapes said, her own mother was distinctly not. Both of the older women would independently harangue young Ina on the topic, in part of their ongoing dispute.

... other descendants of Hannie and Laura — those with a direct connection to the Reed brothers — say they were told stories about their Cherokee and Delaware blood similar to those heard by Warren and her brother. Like their cousins, they never questioned the truth of what they were told and apparently made no attempt to document their roots.​

.... Warren’s family, including cousin Mapes, have no documentation of Native American affiliation, nor is there evidence that they are listed on any official tribal roll. While Senator Scott Brown, Warren’s opponent, has used this to question her truthfulness, many who assert such heritage are unable to document it, according to several scholars. During the late 1800s and early 1900s, many Native Americans did not join tribal rolls for a host of complex reasons, including residency requirements, fear of discrimination, and opposition to land allotment policies.

... David Herring of Norman, Okla., one of Warren’s three brothers, said in an interview that even when he was a child his relatives were reluctant to talk about the family’s Native American heritage because “it was not popular in my family.” Only when he begged his grandparents, said Herring, did they finally explain to him: “Your grandfather is part Delaware, a little bitty bit, way back, and your grandmother is part Cherokee. It was not the most popular thing to do in Oklahoma. [Indians] were degraded, looked down on.”

Both the Reeds and the Crawfords are identified as “white” on federal Census forms in the early 20th century that rely upon self-identification. While that may have been a simple statement of fact, they may also have been trying to obscure their ethnicity. At the time, the federal government was attempting to break up reservations by granting land allotments to individual Native Americans, pressing them to assimilate into white society and leave their tribal ways behind. The goal, as one officer bluntly put it, was to “kill the Indian and save the man.” Those who could pass for white — or convince the census taker that they were — sometimes did.

“If someone was not white, they were a little bit less of a citizen,” said Matt Reed, the curator of the American Indian Collections at the Oklahoma Historical Society in Oklahoma City, whose mother was a Pawnee Indian. “If you had darker skin, you were a lesser human. So, if your skin was light enough to pass as not being Indian, then you just passed as white and your life was a lot better off. A lot more people did that than you might think.” <=

--- Boston.com​

So from this article I count:

• Three siblings;
• Three distant cousins, at least one and possibly all of whom don't know Warren;
• An undetermined number of other cousins;
• And a college friend

--- ALL corroborating the family folklore. Seven-plus people.

You got ............ zero.

Then she should have no problem proving it, oh wait, she can't. Never mind!

She doesn't *NEED* to --- however I just provided you with seven-plus people who corroborate the family lore, which is all it was ever proposed to be.

YOU on the other hand made an assertion of an action, to wit that "she lied". That leaves *YOU* the burden of proof. And that means you have to show that (a) the heritage description was not true *AND* that (b) she knew it was not true. *BOTH* must exist for a "lie'.

You completely *FAILED* to do that, and you're too much of coward to admit you were wrong.

nope, she doesn't need to she lied, I'm over it.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Who's to say he's not?

 

[Pogo]

What the friggety fuck dood --- you can't just waltz around claiming something exists, you *NEED* to prove it does. Don't you get it?

I look forward to this. The first line, literally the subheading, reads:

"The Democratic Senate candidate can't back up family lore that she is part Indian -- but neither is there any evidence that she benefited professionally from these stories."







Reading on ---- the article centers on whether Warren would be eligible for membership in Cherokee Nation. There's just one shortcoming with that premise ----- Warren isn't applying for membership in Cherokee Nation. Never did. She simply said it was in her ancestry. That's in no way the same thing -- see the bold below.

Moreover, quoting from the same article:

=> None of this to say that a Cherokee citizen couldn't look like Warren. Though it confounds many people's expectations, the Cherokee Nation considers being Cherokee as much an ethnicity as anything racial, and given the tribe's centuries-long history of intermarriage there are many Cherokee citizens today who do not look stereotypically Native American. As well, "there are a lot of folks who are legitimately Cherokee who are not eligible for citizenship," said Krehbiel-Burton, because, for example, their ancestors lived in distant states or territories when the rolls were drawn up, or because they are direct descendants of people left off the rolls for other reasons. <=​

Plus, it repeats, copiously, the earlier linked evidence that there was specifically no preferential treatment either offered to, or sought by Warren, at Harvard as well as at Rutgers and the University of Texas. Matter of fact this article makes that point more strongly than the PolitiFact link did.

You just dug yourself deeper.

Oh and there's more corroboration of the family stories in my last link that I didn't even quote...

Shows the tribes wanting proof and it shows it was her great great grandmother.

I dug nothing, you cherry pick what you want and don't want to believe. My opinion is she lied and you can believe what you want.

NO. IT. DOES. NOT.
Nowhere in your article is any tribe "wanting proof". Why do you lie when I've got the article right in front of me?

AGAIN ---- why the fuck would "several tribes" --- or any tribes --- "want proof"?? What the fuck do they care?

I don't know why they care but they do, ask them!

Cherokee group challenges Warren

Read your own link. That ain't the Cherokee Nation --- it's, and I quote, "people purporting to be “concerned” members and descendants of three Cherokee tribes"

I can "purport to be" the Queen of Belgium if I want. And you can too.

Further, they are reported as saying, and again I quote, directed to Warren, "it isn’t who you claim, but instead, who claims you".

Well ---- no it ain't. Nobody in the world needs permission from some group of purporters to describe their own heritage and family stories. NOBODY.

The Republic of Ireland has never "claimed" me --- nor does it need to. Have you heard from the government of Italy?

THINK about it.

Pathetic, dood. Burden of proof.

>> Cornsilk, who explained that members of the new group have no intention of getting involved in the politics of the highly anticipated Senate race in Massachusetts, said that if records from Harvard show that Warren’s false claims helped her get a job, the Democratic candidate would owe Cherokees a sincere apology. <<​

It's already been established that no such thing occurred. YOUR OWN LINK from the Atlantic spelled that out profusely. The entire suggestion is loser bullshit rhetoric from a losing political campaign, contrived by a loser who lost.

Moreover your link is FOUR YEARS OLD. All of these questions raised by the loser have long since been addressed.

Yet here you are still trying to sell it.

Pathetic dood.

Interesting opinion, not much else. She lied, that's life. She has no proof, it's over.

No --- YOU lied. You made, and continue to make, an assertion for which you have no proof.

Warren doesn't *NEED* your approval. Just as your claim to be Italian doesn't need mine. I don't have the standing to declare "you lied", nor do I have any interest therein anyway.

GET IT YET?

You have no position. You're bankrupt.

 

[Pogo]

Day 2,574. Number of Warren Indian ancestors is still pinned at zero.

It's possible that the Great great great grandfather of a second cousin was 1/4 Indian. Still not enough for her to declare herself as Indian

Actually it's her own grandfather, directly. I posted his picture above. Go all you like, it's not going away.

Harry Reed?

LOL

\Scott Brown: Elizabeth Warren Should Do DNA Test To Prove Her Native American Heritage (Libs Livid)

He's not shown as a Indian anywhere, just another of Squirrely Cheekbones that maybe, according to family legend, with all evidence to the contrary, he was 1/4 Indian.

"All were always found in all records as white.

Generation 2

2. Harry Gunn Reed: born 1 Oct 1872 in Mount Vernon, Jefferson County, Illinois; married 2 Jun 1893 in Sebastian, Arkansas, United States; died 23 Dec 1956 in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma County, Oklahoma."

Yes they were. And if you actually read the post, I explained why.

 

[Pogo]

Who's to say he's not?

".... and then one day I heard my first Mantovani record, and I knew these were my people...."

 

[easyt65]

HOW DARE a Conservative ask a Liberal to provide evidence to substantiate their lie, er, um, I mean their claim?!




Did Obama provide the evidence to support his claim that he was a 'product of Selma'?
Did Hillary provide any evidence to support her claim that she was named after Sir Edmund Hillary?

The audacity of these Conservatives to dare question known Liberal liars!

 

[NOLA Gator]

Warren lied and took advantage of "DIVERSITY" Supreme Court just upheld this for deserving students. She should have to at least pay back tuition to pay for a minority student.

Oh, but rules don't apply to you Elitist Progressives. This is why she/y'all can't understand "Take America Back" or "Make America Great Again". It has nothing to do with race.

 

[Pogo]

Warren lied and took advantage of "DIVERSITY" Supreme Court just upheld this for deserving students.

Nope, wrong. That myth keeps floating like a turd but myth it is.
If it were real, you could back it up --- but you can't because no such backup exists. That's uh, what makes it a "myth".

Here, sit down and lemme read to you from an article already supplied by one of the other turdflingers. This is his own link that he couldn't be bothered to read ----

=> Warren, who graduated from the University of Houston in 1970 and got her law degree from Rutgers University in 1976, did not seek to take advantage of affirmative action policies during her education, according documents obtained by the Associated Press and The Boston Globe. On the application to Rutgers Law School she was asked, "Are you interested in applying for admission under the Program for Minority Group Students?'' "No," she replied.

While a teacher at the University of Texas, she listed herself as "white." But between 1986 and 1995, she listed herself as a minority in the Association of American Law Schools Directory of Faculty; the University of Pennsylvania in a 2005 "minority equity report" also listed her as one of the minority professors who had taught at its law school.

The head of the committee that brought Warren to Harvard Law School said talk of Native American ties was not a factor in recruiting her to the prestigious institution. Reported the Boston Herald in April in its first story on Warren's ancestry claim: "Harvard Law professor Charles Fried, a former U.S. Solicitor General who served under Ronald Reagan, sat on the appointing committee that recommended Warren for hire in 1995. He said he didn't recall her Native American heritage ever coming up during the hiring process.

"'It simply played no role in the appointments process. It was not mentioned and I didn't mention it to the faculty,' he said."

He repeated himself this week, telling the Herald: "In spite of conclusive evidence to the contrary, the story continues to circulate that Elizabeth Warren enjoyed some kind of affirmative action leg-up in her hiring as a full professor by the Harvard Law School. The innuendo is false."

"I can state categorically that the subject of her Native American ancestry never once was mentioned," he added.

That view was echoed by Law School Professor Laurence H. Tribe, who voted to tenure Warren and was also involved in recruiting her.

"Elizabeth Warren's heritage had absolutely no role in the decision to recruit her to Harvard Law School," he told the Crimson. "Our decision was entirely based on her extraordinary expertise and legendary teaching ability. This whole dispute is fabricated out of whole cloth and has no connection to reality." <= ---- thanks to Papageorgio; this is from his own link​

I find interesting the paragraph that follows though:

=> And that's the second arena where an absence of evidence should have some weight. If there's no easily located evidence that Warren has Native American ancestry, there's also no evidence Warren used her family story to boost herself into a Harvard job. <=​

See where we are?

---- on the one hand, no definitive proof either way of Indian heritage, means "she lied"...
---- on the other hand, no definitive proof that she manipulated any kind of "advantage" out of it means, "she manipulated some kind of advantage out of it".

In spite of coming up completely empty every time the point is challenged. And I mean every time. I've been through this issue in several threads here, inevitably with the same results.

Having it both ways --- Priceless. Partisan hacks hear what they want to hear and disregard the rest, even when it directly contradicts the position y'all wish had been true.

Flaming hypocrites.

 

[RandallFlagg]

The woman is a fraud plain and simple. Good for Scott Brown to call her out on it creating media and liberal outrage all day. At least Obama was truthful about his heritage when he was at Harvard.

Scott Brown: Fauxahontas Warren Should Take DNA Test

What for? Who cares?

Don't have an answer for that, do ya McRacist?

I have an answer - it's called fraud. If she bullshitted her heritage to get "paid" - she needs to pay the money back. Pure and simple. If, on the other hand, she takes the test and it comes back conclusive that she is American Indian - I will stop calling her "Fauxcahontas". Until then? She is a liberal ISIS supporting Fraud.

 

[RandallFlagg]

Warren lied and took advantage of "DIVERSITY" Supreme Court just upheld this for deserving students.

Nope, wrong. That myth keeps floating like a turd but myth it is.
If it were real, you could back it up --- but you can't because no such backup exists.

Here, sit down and lemme read to you from an article already supplied by one of the other turdflingers. This is his own link that he couldn't be bothered to read ----

=> Warren, who graduated from the University of Houston in 1970 and got her law degree from Rutgers University in 1976, did not seek to take advantage of affirmative action policies during her education, according documents obtained by the Associated Press and The Boston Globe. On the application to Rutgers Law School she was asked, "Are you interested in applying for admission under the Program for Minority Group Students?'' "No," she replied.

While a teacher at the University of Texas, she listed herself as "white." But between 1986 and 1995, she listed herself as a minority in the Association of American Law Schools Directory of Faculty; the University of Pennsylvania in a 2005 "minority equity report" also listed her as one of the minority professors who had taught at its law school.

The head of the committee that brought Warren to Harvard Law School said talk of Native American ties was not a factor in recruiting her to the prestigious institution. Reported the Boston Herald in April in its first story on Warren's ancestry claim: "Harvard Law professor Charles Fried, a former U.S. Solicitor General who served under Ronald Reagan, sat on the appointing committee that recommended Warren for hire in 1995. He said he didn't recall her Native American heritage ever coming up during the hiring process.

"'It simply played no role in the appointments process. It was not mentioned and I didn't mention it to the faculty,' he said."

He repeated himself this week, telling the Herald: "In spite of conclusive evidence to the contrary, the story continues to circulate that Elizabeth Warren enjoyed some kind of affirmative action leg-up in her hiring as a full professor by the Harvard Law School. The innuendo is false."

"I can state categorically that the subject of her Native American ancestry never once was mentioned," he added.

That view was echoed by Law School Professor Laurence H. Tribe, who voted to tenure Warren and was also involved in recruiting her.

"Elizabeth Warren's heritage had absolutely no role in the decision to recruit her to Harvard Law School," he told the Crimson. "Our decision was entirely based on her extraordinary expertise and legendary teaching ability. This whole dispute is fabricated out of whole cloth and has no connection to reality." <=​

I find interesting the paragraph that follows though:

=> And that's the second arena where an absence of evidence should have some weight. If there's no easily located evidence that Warren has Native American ancestry, there's also no evidence Warren used her family story to boost herself into a Harvard job. <=​

See where we are?

---- on the one hand, no definitive proof either way of Indian heritage, means "she lied"...
---- on the other hand, no definitive proof that she manipulated any kind of "advantage" out of it means, "she manipulated some kind of advantage out of it".

In spite of coming up completely empty every time the point is challenged. And I mean every time. I've been through this issue in several threads here, inevitably with the same results.

Having it both ways --- Priceless. Partisan hacks hear what they want to hear and disregard the rest, even when it directly contradicts the position y'all wish were true.

Flaming hypocrites.

Said the pot to the kettle.....

 

[Pogo]

Warren lied and took advantage of "DIVERSITY" Supreme Court just upheld this for deserving students.

Nope, wrong. That myth keeps floating like a turd but myth it is.
If it were real, you could back it up --- but you can't because no such backup exists.

Here, sit down and lemme read to you from an article already supplied by one of the other turdflingers. This is his own link that he couldn't be bothered to read ----

=> Warren, who graduated from the University of Houston in 1970 and got her law degree from Rutgers University in 1976, did not seek to take advantage of affirmative action policies during her education, according documents obtained by the Associated Press and The Boston Globe. On the application to Rutgers Law School she was asked, "Are you interested in applying for admission under the Program for Minority Group Students?'' "No," she replied.

While a teacher at the University of Texas, she listed herself as "white." But between 1986 and 1995, she listed herself as a minority in the Association of American Law Schools Directory of Faculty; the University of Pennsylvania in a 2005 "minority equity report" also listed her as one of the minority professors who had taught at its law school.

The head of the committee that brought Warren to Harvard Law School said talk of Native American ties was not a factor in recruiting her to the prestigious institution. Reported the Boston Herald in April in its first story on Warren's ancestry claim: "Harvard Law professor Charles Fried, a former U.S. Solicitor General who served under Ronald Reagan, sat on the appointing committee that recommended Warren for hire in 1995. He said he didn't recall her Native American heritage ever coming up during the hiring process.

"'It simply played no role in the appointments process. It was not mentioned and I didn't mention it to the faculty,' he said."

He repeated himself this week, telling the Herald: "In spite of conclusive evidence to the contrary, the story continues to circulate that Elizabeth Warren enjoyed some kind of affirmative action leg-up in her hiring as a full professor by the Harvard Law School. The innuendo is false."

"I can state categorically that the subject of her Native American ancestry never once was mentioned," he added.

That view was echoed by Law School Professor Laurence H. Tribe, who voted to tenure Warren and was also involved in recruiting her.

"Elizabeth Warren's heritage had absolutely no role in the decision to recruit her to Harvard Law School," he told the Crimson. "Our decision was entirely based on her extraordinary expertise and legendary teaching ability. This whole dispute is fabricated out of whole cloth and has no connection to reality." <=​

I find interesting the paragraph that follows though:

=> And that's the second arena where an absence of evidence should have some weight. If there's no easily located evidence that Warren has Native American ancestry, there's also no evidence Warren used her family story to boost herself into a Harvard job. <=​

See where we are?

---- on the one hand, no definitive proof either way of Indian heritage, means "she lied"...
---- on the other hand, no definitive proof that she manipulated any kind of "advantage" out of it means, "she manipulated some kind of advantage out of it".

In spite of coming up completely empty every time the point is challenged. And I mean every time. I've been through this issue in several threads here, inevitably with the same results.

Having it both ways --- Priceless. Partisan hacks hear what they want to hear and disregard the rest, even when it directly contradicts the position y'all wish were true.

Flaming hypocrites.

Said the pot to the kettle.....

Proved my point, did I not?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Day 2,574. Number of Warren Indian ancestors is still pinned at zero.

It's possible that the Great great great grandfather of a second cousin was 1/4 Indian. Still not enough for her to declare herself as Indian

Actually it's her own grandfather, directly. I posted his picture above. Go all you like, it's not going away.

Harry Reed?

LOL

\Scott Brown: Elizabeth Warren Should Do DNA Test To Prove Her Native American Heritage (Libs Livid)

He's not shown as a Indian anywhere, just another of Squirrely Cheekbones that maybe, according to family legend, with all evidence to the contrary, he was 1/4 Indian.

"All were always found in all records as white.

Generation 2

2. Harry Gunn Reed: born 1 Oct 1872 in Mount Vernon, Jefferson County, Illinois; married 2 Jun 1893 in Sebastian, Arkansas, United States; died 23 Dec 1956 in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma County, Oklahoma."

Yes they were. And if you actually read the post, I explained why.

Um, because they were white

 

[Pogo]

Day 2,574. Number of Warren Indian ancestors is still pinned at zero.

It's possible that the Great great great grandfather of a second cousin was 1/4 Indian. Still not enough for her to declare herself as Indian

Actually it's her own grandfather, directly. I posted his picture above. Go all you like, it's not going away.

Harry Reed?

LOL

\Scott Brown: Elizabeth Warren Should Do DNA Test To Prove Her Native American Heritage (Libs Livid)

He's not shown as a Indian anywhere, just another of Squirrely Cheekbones that maybe, according to family legend, with all evidence to the contrary, he was 1/4 Indian.

"All were always found in all records as white.

Generation 2

2. Harry Gunn Reed: born 1 Oct 1872 in Mount Vernon, Jefferson County, Illinois; married 2 Jun 1893 in Sebastian, Arkansas, United States; died 23 Dec 1956 in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma County, Oklahoma."

Yes they were. And if you actually read the post, I explained why.

Um, because they were white

They were self-reported as "white". In a time when self-reporting as anything else was self-destructive.

Duh.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Day 2,574. Number of Warren Indian ancestors is still pinned at zero.

It's possible that the Great great great grandfather of a second cousin was 1/4 Indian. Still not enough for her to declare herself as Indian

Actually it's her own grandfather, directly. I posted his picture above. Go all you like, it's not going away.

Harry Reed?

LOL

\Scott Brown: Elizabeth Warren Should Do DNA Test To Prove Her Native American Heritage (Libs Livid)

He's not shown as a Indian anywhere, just another of Squirrely Cheekbones that maybe, according to family legend, with all evidence to the contrary, he was 1/4 Indian.

"All were always found in all records as white.

Generation 2

2. Harry Gunn Reed: born 1 Oct 1872 in Mount Vernon, Jefferson County, Illinois; married 2 Jun 1893 in Sebastian, Arkansas, United States; died 23 Dec 1956 in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma County, Oklahoma."

Yes they were. And if you actually read the post, I explained why.

Um, because they were white

They were self-reported as "white". In a time when self-reporting as anything else was self-destructive.

Duh.

They we're "self reported" as white because they were white.

Duh

 

[Pogo]

Actually it's her own grandfather, directly. I posted his picture above. Go all you like, it's not going away.

Harry Reed?

LOL

\Scott Brown: Elizabeth Warren Should Do DNA Test To Prove Her Native American Heritage (Libs Livid)

He's not shown as a Indian anywhere, just another of Squirrely Cheekbones that maybe, according to family legend, with all evidence to the contrary, he was 1/4 Indian.

"All were always found in all records as white.

Generation 2

2. Harry Gunn Reed: born 1 Oct 1872 in Mount Vernon, Jefferson County, Illinois; married 2 Jun 1893 in Sebastian, Arkansas, United States; died 23 Dec 1956 in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma County, Oklahoma."

Yes they were. And if you actually read the post, I explained why.

Um, because they were white

They were self-reported as "white". In a time when self-reporting as anything else was self-destructive.

Duh.

They we're "self reported" as white because they were white.

Duh

From the same post you can't seem to read:

At the time, the federal government was attempting to break up reservations by granting land allotments to individual Native Americans, pressing them to assimilate into white society and leave their tribal ways behind. The goal, as one officer bluntly put it, was to “kill the Indian and save the man.” Those who could pass for white — or convince the census taker that they were — sometimes did.

“If someone was not white, they were a little bit less of a citizen,” said Matt Reed, the curator of the American Indian Collections at the Oklahoma Historical Society in Oklahoma City, whose mother was a Pawnee Indian. “If you had darker skin, you were a lesser human. So, if your skin was light enough to pass as not being Indian, then you just passed as white and your life was a lot better off. A lot more people did that than you might think.”

Ask some light-skinned black people how that worked. In the same era, when lynchings were rampant.

And once again, you prolly can't read this part either:

"Self-reported".

You're saying Harry Reed was incapable of bending the truth?
That's ironic, since you can make more of a case that "Harry Reed lied" than that "Liz Warren lied".

Think about it.