WaPo uncovers Liz Warren’s 1986 bar app. Race handwritten as “American Indian”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It sounds like we all can just start listing anything.

People are allowed to self-identity, yes. For example, many Native American tribes also get very upset when African-Americans claim Native American identity, even though intermarriage between these communities is well documented, because of racism/colorism. We don’t want a system where the state is making determinations based on complexion tests.

NA tribes are very strict. They make the determination. There are a lot of benefits associated with being a member of various tribes. along with their own ideal/interest in 'self preservation' -including discouraging marrying and having child birth outside the lineage through a loss in said status. I'm guessing E. Warren would not pass their standards. For NA, they make the determination. Yes, we can all self identify but in this case I would guess a tribe has to agree for her to have actual standing. For AA and really all racial groups it is interesting--as we know the phenotype can be very different from the genotype. My interracial child appears to be Caucasian. For "hispanics/latinos" --that's a culture and a massive mix. Travel to South America and you'll find half of them are displaced Italians. I can see giving a special opportunity to a quechua indian from the Andes. not sure why an Italian/Argentinian merits any special designation. At some point these categories get ludicrous. I am hoping all these check boxes will disappear, but liberals especially seem to love them. That's why E. Warren is so egregious--she's seen to be benefitting (corruptly) from something people like her champion. No one likes that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It sounds like we all can just start listing anything.

People are allowed to self-identity, yes. For example, many Native American tribes also get very upset when African-Americans claim Native American identity, even though intermarriage between these communities is well documented, because of racism/colorism. We don’t want a system where the state is making determinations based on complexion tests.

NA tribes are very strict. They make the determination. There are a lot of benefits associated with being a member of various tribes. along with their own ideal/interest in 'self preservation' -including discouraging marrying and having child birth outside the lineage through a loss in said status. I'm guessing E. Warren would not pass their standards. For NA, they make the determination. Yes, we can all self identify but in this case I would guess a tribe has to agree for her to have actual standing. For AA and really all racial groups it is interesting--as we know the phenotype can be very different from the genotype. My interracial child appears to be Caucasian. For "hispanics/latinos" --that's a culture and a massive mix. Travel to South America and you'll find half of them are displaced Italians. I can see giving a special opportunity to a quechua indian from the Andes. not sure why an Italian/Argentinian merits any special designation. At some point these categories get ludicrous. I am hoping all these check boxes will disappear, but liberals especially seem to love them. That's why E. Warren is so egregious--she's seen to be benefitting (corruptly) from something people like her champion. No one likes that.

I think what people do not understand is if you don't have a tribal card, don't vote in tribal elections, and/or don't maintain a tribal identity (meaning the tribe doesn't acknowledge you as one of them) you have zero right to say you are a member of that tribe. This has been my experience with various tribes (Navajo, Apache, Hopi, Tohono O'odem, and Souix).

I really like Elizabeth Warren's work on the credit card industry. I really think she could help get equity in our economic system for working and middle classes but this discussion will never end because of conservatives belief that there is some magical opportunity in Affirmative Action. Poor Affirmative Action has be misrepresented for so long and the GOP just can't see reality anymore. I think it is unlikely she will ever recover from this.

[Anonymous]

She’s toast.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She married Bruce -- Brown University (BA, MA); Yale University (MPhil, JD, PhD) -- in 1980. She had some status envy and did whatever it took. Nobody on Harvard Law School's roster has her degree mill credentials.

It is likely that she was hired at Penn as a condition for Bruce to make the move to Penn, but she was well-qualified for the position. When he moved to Harvard, she was offered only a part-time position at first. Once she got the job, she again proved herself to be an expert in a field of law that the Ivy alumni don't care about. She did not get either job because of any minority claim, but in both cases, probably because they wanted to hire her husband.

It’s always disaster when a woman, especially a feminist, gets a ride to the top from her husband.

I am even more disappointed in Warren now. She’s quite the fraud.

Penn and Harvard might have been too elitist to recruit her if not for her husband, but she excelled at both places and proved that she deserved to be there.

Many people would excel at those places if they had the opportunity

But very few are craven enough to claim to be a minority in order to get a foot in the door

She was not hired based on minority status at either school. She was hired as merely a visiting professor for 1 year at Harvard, went back to Penn for 2 years, and then was hired as a full professor at Harvard based on her professional accomplishments. Then she was tenured at Harvard, again based on merit.

How do you know that those hiring her didn't consider the fact that they thought she was a Native American?

NP, not PP, but the Boston Globe took a really deep dive into this in September.

“Ethnicity not a factor in Elizabeth Warren’s rise in law”
https://www.bostonglobe.com/news/nation/2018/09/01/did-claiming-native-american-heritage-actually-help-elizabeth-warren-get-ahead-but-complicated/wUZZcrKKEOUv5Spnb7IO0K/story.html

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It sounds like we all can just start listing anything.

People are allowed to self-identity, yes. For example, many Native American tribes also get very upset when African-Americans claim Native American identity, even though intermarriage between these communities is well documented, because of racism/colorism. We don’t want a system where the state is making determinations based on complexion tests.

NA tribes are very strict. They make the determination. There are a lot of benefits associated with being a member of various tribes. along with their own ideal/interest in 'self preservation' -including discouraging marrying and having child birth outside the lineage through a loss in said status. I'm guessing E. Warren would not pass their standards. For NA, they make the determination. Yes, we can all self identify but in this case I would guess a tribe has to agree for her to have actual standing. For AA and really all racial groups it is interesting--as we know the phenotype can be very different from the genotype. My interracial child appears to be Caucasian. For "hispanics/latinos" --that's a culture and a massive mix. Travel to South America and you'll find half of them are displaced Italians. I can see giving a special opportunity to a quechua indian from the Andes. not sure why an Italian/Argentinian merits any special designation. At some point these categories get ludicrous. I am hoping all these check boxes will disappear, but liberals especially seem to love them. That's why E. Warren is so egregious--she's seen to be benefitting (corruptly) from something people like her champion. No one likes that.

I think what people do not understand is if you don't have a tribal card, don't vote in tribal elections, and/or don't maintain a tribal identity (meaning the tribe doesn't acknowledge you as one of them) you have zero right to say you are a member of that tribe. This has been my experience with various tribes (Navajo, Apache, Hopi, Tohono O'odem, and Souix).

I really like Elizabeth Warren's work on the credit card industry. I really think she could help get equity in our economic system for working and middle classes but this discussion will never end because of conservatives belief that there is some magical opportunity in Affirmative Action. Poor Affirmative Action has be misrepresented for so long and the GOP just can't see reality anymore. I think it is unlikely she will ever recover from this.

I agree with some of what you say, but when you say "magical" are you saying that affirmative action doesn not privide for a real opportunity? If that is the case, why is it around?

[Anonymous]

The Boston papers were in her pocket. They endorsed her campaign - of course they found some hacks to speculate her ethnicity wasn’t a factor.

[Anonymous]

so she used this to her advantage by screwing other women. Great job Lizzy...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:so she used this to her advantage by screwing other women. Great job Lizzy...

And, insulting Native Americans. But, a smirk is oh, so much worse.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It sounds like we all can just start listing anything.

People are allowed to self-identity, yes. For example, many Native American tribes also get very upset when African-Americans claim Native American identity, even though intermarriage between these communities is well documented, because of racism/colorism. We don’t want a system where the state is making determinations based on complexion tests.

NA tribes are very strict. They make the determination. There are a lot of benefits associated with being a member of various tribes. along with their own ideal/interest in 'self preservation' -including discouraging marrying and having child birth outside the lineage through a loss in said status. I'm guessing E. Warren would not pass their standards. For NA, they make the determination. Yes, we can all self identify but in this case I would guess a tribe has to agree for her to have actual standing. For AA and really all racial groups it is interesting--as we know the phenotype can be very different from the genotype. My interracial child appears to be Caucasian. For "hispanics/latinos" --that's a culture and a massive mix. Travel to South America and you'll find half of them are displaced Italians. I can see giving a special opportunity to a quechua indian from the Andes. not sure why an Italian/Argentinian merits any special designation. At some point these categories get ludicrous. I am hoping all these check boxes will disappear, but liberals especially seem to love them. That's why E. Warren is so egregious--she's seen to be benefitting (corruptly) from something people like her champion. No one likes that.

I think what people do not understand is if you don't have a tribal card, don't vote in tribal elections, and/or don't maintain a tribal identity (meaning the tribe doesn't acknowledge you as one of them) you have zero right to say you are a member of that tribe. This has been my experience with various tribes (Navajo, Apache, Hopi, Tohono O'odem, and Souix).

I really like Elizabeth Warren's work on the credit card industry. I really think she could help get equity in our economic system for working and middle classes but this discussion will never end because of conservatives belief that there is some magical opportunity in Affirmative Action. Poor Affirmative Action has be misrepresented for so long and the GOP just can't see reality anymore. I think it is unlikely she will ever recover from this.

I agree with some of what you say, but when you say "magical" are you saying that affirmative action doesn not privide for a real opportunity? If that is the case, why is it around?

I wish my Indian-American son could self-claim as Black in college application. He does look like one.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This just supports that she believed she was Native American - which supports what she says now. OK? so what?

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The Boston papers were in her pocket. They endorsed her campaign - of course they found some hacks to speculate her ethnicity wasn’t a factor.

The “hack” the Boston Globe found - Annie Linskey - is the same reporter who FOIAd Warren’s Texas bar registration card and wrote the article in the OP of this thread. She now works for the Washington Post.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This just supports that she believed she was Native American - which supports what she says now. OK? so what?

+1

Then, why did she claim she was white just a year earlier?

[Anonymous]

She should do all republicans a favor and run for office.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It sounds like we all can just start listing anything.

People are allowed to self-identity, yes. For example, many Native American tribes also get very upset when African-Americans claim Native American identity, even though intermarriage between these communities is well documented, because of racism/colorism. We don’t want a system where the state is making determinations based on complexion tests.

NA tribes are very strict. They make the determination. There are a lot of benefits associated with being a member of various tribes. along with their own ideal/interest in 'self preservation' -including discouraging marrying and having child birth outside the lineage through a loss in said status. I'm guessing E. Warren would not pass their standards. For NA, they make the determination. Yes, we can all self identify but in this case I would guess a tribe has to agree for her to have actual standing. For AA and really all racial groups it is interesting--as we know the phenotype can be very different from the genotype. My interracial child appears to be Caucasian. For "hispanics/latinos" --that's a culture and a massive mix. Travel to South America and you'll find half of them are displaced Italians. I can see giving a special opportunity to a quechua indian from the Andes. not sure why an Italian/Argentinian merits any special designation. At some point these categories get ludicrous. I am hoping all these check boxes will disappear, but liberals especially seem to love them. That's why E. Warren is so egregious--she's seen to be benefitting (corruptly) from something people like her champion. No one likes that.

I think what people do not understand is if you don't have a tribal card, don't vote in tribal elections, and/or don't maintain a tribal identity (meaning the tribe doesn't acknowledge you as one of them) you have zero right to say you are a member of that tribe. This has been my experience with various tribes (Navajo, Apache, Hopi, Tohono O'odem, and Souix).

I really like Elizabeth Warren's work on the credit card industry. I really think she could help get equity in our economic system for working and middle classes but this discussion will never end because of conservatives belief that there is some magical opportunity in Affirmative Action. Poor Affirmative Action has be misrepresented for so long and the GOP just can't see reality anymore. I think it is unlikely she will ever recover from this.

You're blaming her difficult situation on conservatives?! Absurd. Actually, she's having difficulty recovering from her vague and disingenuous responses when questioned about the issue or outright saying, "I don't recall."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The Boston papers were in her pocket. They endorsed her campaign - of course they found some hacks to speculate her ethnicity wasn’t a factor.

+1 yep!