The Woman Who Knew Too Much - Page 2 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind
Click Here to Login
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 05-05-2012, 04:06 PM   #16
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 16,297
Local Time: 08:30 PM
Oh it's just INDY repeating Mark Steyn. Par for the course.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/01/us...-say.html?_r=2
__________________

__________________
anitram is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-2012, 06:02 PM   #17
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: The American Resistance
Posts: 4,754
Local Time: 07:30 PM
Composite Americans - Mark Steyn - National Review Online

Conservative media has been riffing on this for a week. Again the double standard, imagine if this were a Republican.
__________________

__________________
INDY500 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-2012, 09:41 PM   #18
Acrobat
 
ladyfreckles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Seattle
Posts: 402
Local Time: 06:30 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by U2DMfan View Post
My step-dad too.

I tried to reason with him (he is actually a good hearted guy that can be reasonable but he's not the sharpest tool in the shed) and he was not having it.

I'm talking refusal to even hear a rebuttal.
Yep. Mine too. He means well, and he's genuinely scared for his country, but it's very misguided and uninformed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by INDY500 View Post
Composite Americans - Mark Steyn - National Review Online

Conservative media has been riffing on this for a week. Again the double standard, imagine if this were a Republican.
Oh woopdidoo, over a decade ago she puts "indian" down on a form and suddenly she's some sort of bad person or has an ulterior motive? I used to tell people I was Italian when I'm only half. It doesn't matter. Does conservative media have to make everything about race? I'm curious to see how or why this matters.
__________________
ladyfreckles is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-2012, 10:08 PM   #19
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,499
Local Time: 08:30 PM
I cant imagine how difficult it must be to be a conservative.
__________________
Irvine511 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-2012, 11:02 PM   #20
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,499
Local Time: 08:30 PM
Does Steyn have anything to offer other than nastiness?
__________________
Irvine511 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-06-2012, 12:32 AM   #21
Acrobat
 
ladyfreckles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Seattle
Posts: 402
Local Time: 06:30 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post
Does Steyn have anything to offer other than nastiness?
No, and I'll never forget my dad quoting him when he told me I shouldn't be friends with muslims because all muslims are radical and hate women.
__________________
ladyfreckles is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-06-2012, 08:27 PM   #22
Forum Moderator
 
yolland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 7,471
Local Time: 02:30 AM
I can definitely see where there's an ethical issue there if she presented herself as Native American on job applications or during the hiring process. From what I've read, there's no evidence of that. But her campaign did handle this story poorly; it shouldn't have been difficult to provide a concise explanation for why the Harvard Law School spokesman who described her as Native would've thought that, and I cringed when she responded to questions about what she'd based her claim on by invoking family anecdotes about her grandfather's "cheekbones."
__________________
yolland [at] interference.com


μελετώ αποτυγχάνειν. -- Διογένης της Σινώπης
yolland is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-07-2012, 04:02 AM   #23
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
U2DMfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: It's Inside A Black Hole
Posts: 6,637
Local Time: 07:30 PM
If you knew how hard it was to document real NA ancestry, you wouldn't cringe at all. It's all a lot of people have...appearances and family stories. Especially if your family is deep rooted in the South or later in Indian Territory. You might not be passing off family 'legend' in the least. I have numerous personal stories to share but I'll save them.

Elizabeth Warren has as much documented Cherokee ancestry as the current chief of the Cherokee Tribe. 1/32nd. Now isn't that something?

Just because you have only a certain amount of confirmed (documented) NA ancestry, does not mean that it cannot be higher. In fact, a ton of NA blood legacy is lost, because it cannot be traced - through a paper trail or through the Y-Dna or mtDna tests.

Why? 2 specific reasons that I know of. The DNA thing is simple. If a Euro man married a NA woman (probably the most common occurrence in this situation) then the Y-DNA tests would never show it. Y-DNA is paternal; father to father and so on. If the Euro woman married a NA man, it would show up in the Y-DNA of only the male descendants but not in the mtDNA at all, which is maternal; from mother to mother to mother, etc.

The other reason is more complicated and has to do with 'passing'.
It was shameful to self-identify as 'Indian' as recent as the early 20th century.
They would 'pass' as White, almost always, if they could - most especially in the South during the 18th and 19th centuries, where most of the cross-breeding took place. Specifically during forced removal in the 19th century. Because, after all, if you were a fair skinned mixed Euro-Cherokee, you could almost certainly pass as White. And there are cases of 100% Cherokees passing as White as well. And when it came time to be forced to go to Indian Territory, a lot of people 'passed' (if they could) as White so they could stay in their native lands. And so, because of this, much of the documentation of that heritage is impossible to find because in census records they are listed as White from there on out.

So, if you were a 2nd or 3rd generation NA descendant from a NA woman passing as White, and they came around and started taking names for the Dawes Roll (or the like) there was no way in hell you'd have signed up because you likely couldn't confirm it even if you knew it yourself. Much less hope that 100+ years later a descendant would be able to confirm such a thing. More or less, if your NA ancestors aren't on those Rolls, in the eyes of the Government, you aren't NA. Or certainly not enough 'to worry about'.

Fires have notoriously destroyed a lot of documentation throughout the years. So we don't know how many local census or tax rolls could shed more light on these things, for particular descendants. Most notably...almost all of the 1890 Federal Census was destroyed by fire. And that happened in DC...in the 20th century. My paternal side is from a county in Mississippi that lost all of it's records dating before about 1880. Which totally sucks, for an amateur genealogist like myself. Point being, we are relying on limited, biased and 'fragile' paper documentation to do our assorted genealogies.

Anyone with deep 18th and 19th century Southern roots, could very easily have unverifiable NA ancestry. But especially those that also have deep roots in Oklahoma. Generations of children were and are born with NA features and there is no way to document it. Why? Because of personal shame brought about by racism and ignorance of past generations. And now the trails are beyond 'cold', they are totally dead. Well, outside of those lucky enough to be able to have exclusively maternal or paternal NA ancestors without breaking that chain (one instance of father-mother passing of NA ancestry or vice versa would render that line untraceable by those two DNA tests).

I don't know Elizabeth Warren's family tree, I have only seen what I read in the Washington Post the other day, that independent genealogists confirmed her 1/32nd of Cherokee. But considering that she's several generations Okie, her ancestral American family (either side) might well originally be from the South (Oklahoma is not part of the South). It wouldn't surprise me if she had more NA ancestry than that. But she might not. I would imagine 90% of the parroting Right Wingers didn't even know she was from Oklahoma, thinking of her as just another Massachusetts liberal librul.
__________________
U2DMfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-07-2012, 10:35 AM   #24
Acrobat
 
ladyfreckles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Seattle
Posts: 402
Local Time: 06:30 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by yolland View Post
I can definitely see where there's an ethical issue there if she presented herself as Native American on job applications or during the hiring process. From what I've read, there's no evidence of that. But her campaign did handle this story poorly; it shouldn't have been difficult to provide a concise explanation for why the Harvard Law School spokesman who described her as Native would've thought that, and I cringed when she responded to questions about what she'd based her claim on by invoking family anecdotes about her grandfather's "cheekbones."
Native American heritage is a complicated thing. See U2DMfan's post.

However, if I recall correctly, this was done during a time it was required that Harvard have more minorities. I know in an interview she said she was hoping to meet certain people, but that meeting never happened, so she gave up. Something more important to recall is that this ended in 1995--seventeen years ago. Seventeen years is a very long time, and people change a lot during that time. The nature of this "scandal" is so pathetic and small that it being seventeen years old excuses it alone.
__________________
ladyfreckles is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-07-2012, 04:18 PM   #25
Forum Moderator
 
yolland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 7,471
Local Time: 02:30 AM
Yes, I'm familiar with the difficulties of defining who is Native American and in particular who is Cherokee. (We had a thread about the ousting of the Freedmen from the Cherokee Nation awhile back.) I'm looking at the present story from the viewpoint of someone who's intimately familiar with the workings of academic search committees, so the potential ethical issue IF Warren had claimed this, based on nothing more than 'family lore,' in the hiring process--and again, I've seen no hard evidence that she did--that's perhaps more prominent to me. This is always a complex issue for search committees because different tribes have totally different criteria for enrollment, while meanwhile the federal government maintains its own 'blood quantum' definitions for some things, and of course there are plenty of people with a great deal of Native ancestry, sometimes even 'full bloods,' who've never been enrolled with any tribe at all. Some colleges also have somewhat contradictory (for the search committees) policies where on the one hand recruiting Native faculty is a stated goal, but on the other hand there's a stated policy that we'll never question anyone's claims of ancestry. Not that these issues at all come up frequently, but they are there.

I agree that it's a major stretch to make it into a Senate campaign issue, but that's politics for you, and it's in that context that I found her responses puzzlingly clumsy. If the claim had only ever come up in the form of her volunteering bits of family lore in the context of some biographical interview or something, I wouldn't have thought anything of it.

It's not entirely clear to me that the document uncovered last week is definitive evidence of anything; it was an application for marriage license of a male relative (great-great uncle, I think?) who asserted on the application that his mother, the 1/32nd in question, was a Cherokee. But that's neither here nor there with regard to the ethics question.
Quote:
Originally Posted by U2DMfan View Post
My paternal side is from a county in Mississippi that lost all of it's records dating before about 1880. Which totally sucks, for an amateur genealogist like myself. Point being, we are relying on limited, biased and 'fragile' paper documentation to do our assorted genealogies.
I hear you; my younger brother's the amateur genealogist in our family, not me, but while we have no Native American ancestry he's often had to deal with a different version of this problem of distant relatives about whom you know nothing and who may have been hiding parts of who they were. It's a huge amount of work filled with frustrating blind alleys, and my hat's off to anyone who has the patience and persistence to keep at it.
__________________
yolland [at] interference.com


μελετώ αποτυγχάνειν. -- Διογένης της Σινώπης
yolland is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-08-2012, 12:36 PM   #26
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 24,994
Local Time: 08:30 PM
Elizabeth Warren is running tv ads here with Obama in them, singing her praises. So I guess she thinks that will help her somehow.

The Native American thing was an issue the last couple of weeks. I didn't pay much attention to it, don't know enough about it. Also an issue was the fact that Scott Brown has his soon to be 24 year old daughter Ayla on his Senate health plan but one of priorities is getting rid of Obamacare. No surprise there.
__________________
MrsSpringsteen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-08-2012, 02:17 PM   #27
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 24,994
Local Time: 08:30 PM
Boston Globe

By Noah Bierman, Globe Staff

US Senator Scott Brown, in a move sure to keep the controversy over Elizabeth Warren’s Native American identity alive, today called on the Democrat to authorize her employers to release her job applications.

“Her changing stories, contradictions, and refusal to answer legitimate questions have cast doubt on her credibility and called into question the diversity practices at Harvard,” the senator said in a statement.

The statement is the most aggressive Brown has personally been amid questions about whether Warren’s claim boosted her career advancement. She has denied that, as have officials at Harvard Law School, where she has most recently taught.

Last week, the senator cast himself as an outside observer to the issue, even as many strong statements were released under the name of either campaign staffers or Republican Party officials.

“Serious questions have been raised about the legitimacy of Elizabeth Warren’s claims to Native American ancestry and whether it was appropriate for her to assume minority status as a college professor,” Brown wrote today.

In the remainder of his statement, the Republican said: “ The best way to satisfy these questions is for Elizabeth Warren to authorize the release of her law school applications and all personnel files from the various universities where she has taught. I have released hundreds of pages of confidential employment records relating to my 32-year career in the National Guard, and I would encourage Professor Warren to do the same with respect to her personnel records and previous applications. As candidates for high public office, we have a duty to be transparent and open and not hide behind a wall of silence in the midst of public controversy.”
__________________
MrsSpringsteen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-08-2012, 05:28 PM   #28
Acrobat
 
ladyfreckles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Seattle
Posts: 402
Local Time: 06:30 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by yolland View Post
Yes, I'm familiar with the difficulties of defining who is Native American and in particular who is Cherokee. (We had a thread about the ousting of the Freedmen from the Cherokee Nation awhile back.) I'm looking at the present story from the viewpoint of someone who's intimately familiar with the workings of academic search committees, so the potential ethical issue IF Warren had claimed this, based on nothing more than 'family lore,' in the hiring process--and again, I've seen no hard evidence that she did--that's perhaps more prominent to me. This is always a complex issue for search committees because different tribes have totally different criteria for enrollment, while meanwhile the federal government maintains its own 'blood quantum' definitions for some things, and of course there are plenty of people with a great deal of Native ancestry, sometimes even 'full bloods,' who've never been enrolled with any tribe at all. Some colleges also have somewhat contradictory (for the search committees) policies where on the one hand recruiting Native faculty is a stated goal, but on the other hand there's a stated policy that we'll never question anyone's claims of ancestry. Not that these issues at all come up frequently, but they are there.

I agree that it's a major stretch to make it into a Senate campaign issue, but that's politics for you, and it's in that context that I found her responses puzzlingly clumsy. If the claim had only ever come up in the form of her volunteering bits of family lore in the context of some biographical interview or something, I wouldn't have thought anything of it.

It's not entirely clear to me that the document uncovered last week is definitive evidence of anything; it was an application for marriage license of a male relative (great-great uncle, I think?) who asserted on the application that his mother, the 1/32nd in question, was a Cherokee. But that's neither here nor there with regard to the ethics question.
Ah, okay! I understand now.
__________________
ladyfreckles is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-15-2012, 04:07 PM   #29
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 05:30 PM
If I lived in MA, I may still vote for Warren,
why ? because I do not want a Republican Senate controlling who sits on the Supreme Court, we don't need anymore Alitos or Scalias.

But, many may not feel the same way as I do, and if they don't care about that and if they are still not sure?
At this point I think she will lose her contest, based on her choice to misrepresent herself.
__________________
deep is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-15-2012, 04:49 PM   #30
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,499
Local Time: 08:30 PM
look where all that same-sex marriage, taxes, funding of public education, and universal health care gets you:

Massachusetts is the best state in the union. - Slate Magazine


some choice quotes:

Quote:
Let’s compare Massachusetts to its peers on three basic measures of success: education, social well-being, and economic strength. Some Americans believe good results on these metrics are the goals of responsible government, and others believe they’re the happy consequences of free markets. But however we get there, these are desirable outcomes for all Americans.

First up is education, the foundation of America’s meritocratic values and the key to whatever success the country will find in a globalized, knowledge-based economy. Massachusetts is renowned for its higher-education institutions. Less well known, though, is that the home of the original Tea Party also has the best schools in the country. On the most basic measures of educational achievement—fourth- and eighth-grade math and reading skills—Massachusetts tops the nation.

Education Week’s Quality Counts 2012 report expands on this success. On their overall index, Massachusetts ranks second, to Maryland. But on two of the index’s most important measures of results—a lifetime educational Chance for Success index, and a K-12 Achievement index that bundles metrics such as test results, year-on-year improvement, and the gap between poor and wealthier kids (perhaps the truest test of our fabled meritocracy)—the Bay State again leads the nation.

And most of the world. According to a 2011 Harvard study, while reading proficiency in Mississippi is comparable to Russia or Bulgaria, Massachusetts performs more like Singapore, Japan, or South Korea. Often better: Massachusetts students rank fifth in the world in reading, lapping Singapore and Japan, and needless to say, every state in the union. In math, Massachusetts slots in a global ninth, ahead of Japan and Germany. (Some international educational studies rank Shanghai and Hong Kong as separate countries; if this wasn’t done, Massachusetts would likely rank two places higher.)
Quote:
It goes without saying that Massachusetts has the lowest percentage of uninsured residents—5 percent (Thanks Mitt! Mitt? You there, Mitt?), compared to 16 percent nationally, and a whopping 25 percent in Texas. On life expectancy, Massachusetts ties for sixth-highest, about five years longer than the worst-performing states. In another political universe far, far away, you might describe a place like this as pro-life.

A few other metrics of social well-being: The Bay State has the second-lowest teen birth rate, the fourth-lowest suicide rate, and the lowest traffic fatality rate. The birthplace of Dunkin’ Donuts has the sixth-lowest obesity rate. And depending on the source, the first state to legalize gay marriage has either the lowest or one of the very lowest divorce rates in the country.

Quote:
Massachusetts is looking particularly sharp when it comes to the globalized, tech-driven economy on which America’s superpower standing hinges. According to a 2011 report, Massachusetts has the highest per-capita venture capital, patents, and technology licensing of 10 leading high-tech states. Worker productivity in Massachusetts (GDP per employed person) is the third-highest in the world. And research and development spending as a share of GDP in Massachusetts is higher than any country anywhere.

Massachusetts is as green as it is high-tech, and recently displaced California as the nation’s most energy-efficient state. No surprise, then, that the Kauffman Foundation put Massachusetts at the top of its New Economy Index. More surprising, perhaps, is CNBC’s index of America’s top states for business. This is a calculus so ruthlessly focused on corporate competitiveness that it marked states down for high union membership. Massachusetts came in sixth. Not bad for the People’s Republic.
Quote:
So, what of the charge that good outcomes result from high incomes? Lewis says “you might turn the question on its head” and ask, instead, why is Massachusetts so rich? “Massachusetts and others at top of the index tend to make significant public and private investments in the ingredients of well-being,” explains Lewis. Ultimately, these investments pay off both socially and economically. She points out that Maryland is third on Measure of America’s income index, but 33rd in life expectancy. Virginia comes in 6th on income (right behind Massachusetts), but 11th on education, and 25th on health.



so Mittens has lots to be proud of?

oh, wait, the only thing that matters is LOW TAXES because that's the DEFINITION OF FREEDOM! LOW TAXES! that's the ONLY THING THAT MATTERS.
__________________

__________________
Irvine511 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:30 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com