First Transracial Senator?

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Capracus, Mar 12, 2018.

  1. Michael 345 Bali tonight Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,525
    Reported in general news

    The disbelief by the two groups does not invalidate the truth.
    BTW black is a colour not a race

    YES and mostly used in the allocation of funding

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    27,408
    So?
    Marches of swastika flagged guys chanting "Jews will not replace us" are reported in the general news.
    It invalidates your claim.
    The major races are named by color in the US - white, black, yellow, red, brown.
    Very small percentage of decisions.
    Mostly used in daily modifications of behavior, most easily visible in the case of the police and courts - but also fairly obvious in those other list items mentioned, not involving funding allocations.
    We could add a few: hiring patterns, infrastructure standards, health care custom and practice, etc.
     
    Last edited: Mar 15, 2018
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Michael 345 Bali tonight Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,525
    We disagree and you have used up my allocation to you of 3 Pings

    This part of the thread with you is now finished

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    27,408
    You shouldn't have tried to pretend you got your wingnut lying memes from the "general news". That was a waste of pings.
    Except for my stuff, of course, which continues until I decide otherwise.

    The problem with the recent wingnut meme of claiming US society's racial structuring does not exist (or disappeared in 1964 with desegregation, or vanished with Obama's election) is not so much the denial of the reality other people have to live in - that's silly, but it's consistent in principle, with order in the imaginary landscape that one could appeal to -
    the problem is that they forget, from one day to the next, that with it they had discarded the racial attributes on which their complacency with current economic inequality, militarizing and rogue enforcing police, etc, rested. So there's no logic to it - it's a chaotic mess of contradictions. And with reason in ruins, power takes the wheel.
     
  8. RainbowSingularity Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,407
    new world order
    globalisation
    companys moving their head office to countrys where they can pay no tax
    out sourcing labour to 3rd world countrys
    race politics
    ...
    yes it would be nice if you could just remove(replace) the entire process.
    however many people make a vast amount of money from it and that is a global economic system so its not about to suddenly change.

    a good example of the sharper end of the problem would be those alt-right activists who support the mexico border wall to keep out mexcicans while supporting trump to bring-back-american-manufacturing-and-jobs.
    they oppose quota systems and giving compensation to native americans and african americans.

    they promote a concept of race by border and political ideology, political party and national rules and social culture...

    meanwhile seeking to establish their own entity of race while decrying others for expecting the same.

    the Tea-Party is a good example.

    its the pot calling the kettle black while complaining about the fire.
     
  9. Capracus Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,040
    Rage and scream? You can detect volume and temperament in plain text, aren’t you special.

    Seems you’ve turned the issue on it’s head, it’s not about authentic portrayals of fantasy, but as potentially in Warren’s case, her intended reality being shown to be fantasy.
    If I had made a public claim of being HIV positive, wouldn’t it be rationally supposed that I intended the claim to be true? And for the sake of rationality, wouldn’t I be obliged to publicly offer any supporting evidence? So yes, if I truly wanted the public to believe I was HIV positive, I would post it on bathroom stalls and public forums.
    It’s an indicator of her honesty and reasoning skills. What if she were a flat earther or proponent of young earth creationism, would those views matter?
    Clairvoyant are we? Your able to divine my voting record through the internet tubes? If Warren somehow were nominated for president, and given that I agree with her on most of the issues, I can't fathom any reason not to pick her over an opposing republican.
    She only substantiated her present state of ignorance, not the validity of her claimed heritage. If Warren wants to remain ignorant to the possibility that her family stories are fictional or factually inconclusive, then instead of saying she knows who she is, she can say this is who I want to believe I am.
    Now you're claiming she was once a communist? Or that she once played for a Washington professional football team? Are you implying that I want her "Red"ancestry confirmed so that I can condemn her on racial grounds? As in Red people are less than human and unfit for public office? Can you cite evidence of my disdain for "Red" people?
    No, they chose what they were dealt. Just like Trump supporters overlooked his various shortcomings and voted against his opponent, so did and would voters for Warren.
    By publicly claiming she knows who she is without sufficient knowledge to substantiate the claim, the issue remains unsettled.
    Excellent reasoning. Any new evidence regarding any subject is unlikely to change the present understanding of it. Hold the presses, science has just been declared irrelevant.
    And certainly not to someone like yourself who considers the acquisition of knowledge to be pointless.
    If a legitimate doubt existed about Trump's native species, let alone his parentage, a simple DNA test would settle the question. Legitimate questions relating to ones ancestry are commonplace, but other than tabloid and satirical speculation, I’m not aware of such concerns relating to an individuals human identity. Maybe you could do a quick check of your colon and come up with a case.
    If such a senator existed who knowingly attempted to hide their ancestry to proclaim a false connection to a given racial group, then I guess that would qualify for transracial status. And then you get into the whole racial identification issue of whether it’s about an adopted or genetic affiliation that determines racial identity.
    Her own statements. She says her knowledge of her ancestry is based on family recollections. If she has done any investigation beyond that it hasn’t been made public to my knowledge. And the fact the she refuses to take a DNA test would indicate that that hasn’t occurred as well. Or maybe she has done a thorough investigation of her ancestry, didn’t like the result, and has decided to hide it, who knows?
     
  10. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    27,408
    Exactly. So why is he so reluctant to settle the matter?
    So far, you have compared Warren's common and normal family history of Red ancestry to infection by HIV, creationism, and flat earth claims.
    Your ass is showing.
    So she's honest and forthright. What's your problem with that?
    Looks settled to me. It's about as settled as it can get, actually - wingnuts keep banging on about DNA testing, but that's unlikely to settle anything even if she panders to them.
    She has not claimed knowledge beyond her family history.
    She obviously knows who she is - it's her fifth generation Red ancestor who is uncertain.
    And that is almost certainly the case - the "one drop" rule for membership in the Black race in the States of the old Confederacy was onerous, and dishonesty rampant.
     
  11. Bells Staff Member

    Messages:
    22,823
    If her genetic makeup and ancestry is irrelevant to her duties as a Senator, then frankly, the demand she has a DNA test to check her genetic makeup and ancestry means that it does matter enough for some, such as you. In other words, you contradicted yourself.

    I'll state again, her genetic makeup and her ancestry is none of anyone's business but hers and that of her family.

    You didn't answer the question. Why is her claim dubious?

    And why does she have to prove her ancestry to a bunch of people who have shown themselves to be white supremacists?

    And?

    Everyone's ancestry is based on family "myth".

    Why does she have to prove her ancestry for a bunch of white supremacists?

    I have to wonder, did you demand the Kennedy's get DNA tests to make sure they were of Irish stock, for example?

    Did you check your heritage to make sure that your family "myth's" were correct?

    I am curious as to why Warren is being singled out with demands for a DNA test and not anyone else who has claimed ancestry from other countries, as one example?
    Well you kind of are. It's been a few pages now.

    You have accused her of lacking intellectual integrity for not bowing to pressure from white supremacists to check if she has Native American heritage, as though that somehow matters to her work as a Senator, when it clearly does not. I mean, think about it. You are accusing someone of lacking in intellectual integrity for not having a DNA test to check her ancestry because a bunch of white supremacists demand it of her because they deem it important to know her ancestry and they have done so by using fairly bigoted comments.

    Why does it matter? Why does her ancestry matter so much?

    Most Americans don’t realize that even today in 2012, there are three things in America that are categorized by the government according to a pedigree: dogs, horses, and the indigenous people of this land.​


    Is that why it matters? Let's face it, the obsession with her ancestry, the bigoted statements, this demand that she gets a DNA test to prove her ancestry (even though that would not really show much) is because of the need to categorize her "pedigree". No other ethnic groups in the US face this sort of scrutiny when it comes to their ancestry or what they identify as. But when it comes to Warren's family stories about her ancestry, she needs to have a DNA test? Really? One only needs to look at the history behind these demands to know that this stems from pure bigotry and racism:

    TREUER: True. Like in the case of Warren, I understand the furor, and it touches a nerve, and that nerve is tied to affirmative action, but her claims were pretty modest. She didn't claim that she was an enrolled member. She hasn't tried to become enrolled, that I know of, by the way.

    She doesn't claim to be a member of a tribe in any kind of larger cultural sense. She doesn't even claim an American Indian identity. She only claimed American Indian ancestry, and that is, from what I can tell, true.

    CONAN: One-thirty-second, I think, yes.

    TREUER: Yeah, well.

    CONAN: But there it is. We get into questions of blood, and blood gets to be, well, it makes a lot of people very uncomfortable.

    TREUER: It sure does, but blood is the primary criteria to be an enrolled member of a federally recognized tribe. And it's, you know, it's partly that blood quantum requirement was instituted at the urging of the federal government, and it was cynical. It was believed that we would then soon breed ourselves out of at least official existence by intermarrying with non-Natives.

    But it also had a positive benefit in that you could be somewhat certain, if you use blood as a criteria, that the descendants of the people who signed the treaties that really shaped the future of tribes across the country would receive the benefits that devolve from those treaties.

    So I'll ask again, why this demand from white supremacists that she gets a DNA test?

    And why do you think she should cave to those demands given the history of the treatment of Native Americans?

    And?

    So what?

    She is already secure in her present belief. Why does she need to prove it to assuage the feelings of bigots in America? Why do you think she needs to prove her "pedigree" when at the end of the day, she has absolutely no reason to when she is very comfortable with her knowledge of her family's history?

    Huh? She hasn't tried to convince anyone of it. It's others who demand that she tries to convince them. In other words, it's you and others like you who demand to be convinced when in reality it's none of your business.

    She is comfortable with her ancestry that she knows of, why aren't you comfortable with it?

    Why does she need to convince you or anyone else? Why is her ancestry your business, exactly?

    She is confident in her ancestry. Your and others like you who demand DNA evidence are the ones with the issue. Not her. This is your hang-up. Not hers.

    Are you suggesting that people have DNA tests to prove their ancestry following a bigoted and racist history about ancestry of Native Americans is about truth and fairness? Riigghhttt..

    At the end of the day, this is your issue, not hers. The requests, demands, suggestions, racist jokes about her ancestry shows that your country still has a looong way to go when it comes to Native Americans. You are simply a cog in the racist wheel that turns.

    As I said, she's happy with her ancestry. Why aren't you? And why are you demanding that she has a DNA test when she has absolutely no reason to have one?
     
  12. Bells Staff Member

    Messages:
    22,823
    So, you are comparing Native American ancestry to HIV?

    No bigotry there....

    What?

    Really, the idiocy of your bigotry knows no bounds.

    She isn't claiming ignorance about her ancestry. You are. She knows where she is from.

    You and the Trump humpers and white supremacists are the ones with an issue about the "validity of her claimed heritage". She isn't ignorant of her heritage, nor has she indicated she has questions about her heritage. You, on the other hand, are. Why does her ancestry matter so much to you?

    Where has she tried to hide her ancestry? Nor has she made a false connection.

    Why are you insinuating that she has?

    And why do you think a DNA test will settle the matter? I mean, to the one, your reliance on reality shows about it is troubling, since in the US, particularly for Native American genetic ancestry, there is little to go on to prove Native American heritage, since the sample of Native American DNA is so small, to the other, your demands is steeped in racist ideology espoused by white supremacists in the US.
     
  13. Tiassa Let us not launch the boat ... Staff Member

    Messages:
    35,608
    Mod Hat — The obvious

    And you've had five chances to provide a reference.

    If good faith is too much to ask of you, then you don't really have anything to say.
     
  14. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    14,527
    Yep. Like most people I can read.
    Yes.
    You are a strange guy, and I am glad most people are not like you.
    So your one piece of proof you use to prove your claim that she has never researched her own geneaology actually indicates that she HAS researched her own genealogy.

    You are going on and on about how she's not honest based on your feelings on the matter. Why not be honest yourself and just admit you hate her guts because she's a democrat and leave it at that? Why do you feel the need to lie? Lying to support a case that someone else is dishonest is pretty hypocritical.
     
  15. Capracus Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,040
    I can’t do anything about your lack of reading comprehension other than repost the statement.
    She apparently has no problem answering questions about her ancestry, it’s just that the answers she gives aren’t backed with much supportive evidence.
    She offers her family stories as proof of her ancestry, and many people including non-white supremacists aren’t satisfied with that explanation. People have rights to their own standards of proof, and Elizabeth Warren’s seems to be on the low side when it comes to her ancestry.
    I was two years old when JFK was elected president, and ten when his brother ran. So no, as a young child I did not demand a DNA test that did not exist at the time for the Kennedys.
    I have done some poking around in some genealogy sites and put together some loose family trees, but haven’t gotten around to doing any DNA testing yet. I’m not really not that invested in my ancestry as Warren claims to be. If the demand for my personal information was as high as hers, I imagine I would put some effort into pinning it down.
    Lots of public personalities release information about their ancestry because they know there's is public demand for it.

    Barack Obama
    https://www.cbsnews.com/news/surprising-link-found-in-obamas-family-tree/

    Michelle Obama
    http://www.arogundade.com/interesti...kground-ethnicity-birth-date-and-parents.html

    Hollywood Celebs
    https://www.top10bestdnatesting.com/articles/hollywood-celebrities-trace-ancestry

    And the Infamous
    https://www.pbs.org/newshour/science/white-supremacists-respond-genetics-say-theyre-not-white
    Brilliant theory. People only get genealogic DNA testing because some skinhead shames them into it.
    She publicly offered her pedigree, and didn’t sufficiently substantiated it to a standard that she is obviously able to achieve. If she followed the example of Barrack and Michelle Obama we wouldn’t be having this discussion.
    She is happy in her ignorance, I’m not.
    I’m comparing examples of personal information made public that can be substantiated through clinical and investigative methods. You know like getting tested for disease rather than relying on loose speculation. Take off the reactionary goggles and your comprehension might improve.

    Talk about bigotry, you've got something against people who are HIV positive? What the hell’s wrong with you.
    She hides it by promoting it’s uncertainty.
    Would you stop with the idiotic associations. The people on the reality show were legitimately processed in regards to their genealogical work-ups, just like anyone else interested in researching their ancestry. All anyone can ask of Warren is that she put the same effort into documenting her ancestry as other prominent people have. Its very likely that a combination of family research and selective genetic testing could lead to a more complete understanding of her ancestry.

    Now go check under your bed for bigoted white nationalists.
    Try working on the translation part.
    Recalling family stories is not research, validating the content of those stories would entail research. According to this article there seems to be plenty of fodder for additional investigation and testing to prove Warren's case.

    Elizabeth Warren’s family has mixed memories about heritage
    https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2...ut-heritage/o9oXvDiUMcXiipkyuinU5M/story.html

    It makes no sense to me why she is reluctant to pursue it.
    I don’t dislike Warren, and I admire her political positions, but I don’t agree or respect her course on this ancestry issue. While not a registered Democrat, I’ve voted Democrat my entire life with the exception of a hand full of local Green votes. So her being a Democrat is a plus in my book.
     
  16. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    14,527
    ?? Recording firsthand experiences is not research?

    You've never done any research, have you.

    So in other words - they are like most families.
     
  17. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    27,408
    They don't regard it as an obligation to release stuff because racist imbeciles badger them over it for political advantage. They control what they release, and when, and why, for their own reasons.
    Pedigree?
    Your ass is showing.
    She sufficiently substantiated her personal view of her ancestry to the degree any reasonable and honestly motivated person is happy to accept.
    The list of prominent people who have publicly documented their specific ancestry back five generations by DNA analysis is pretty damn short. The list of those who have done so in response to the angry and pejorative-infused demands of mobs of racist imbeciles badgering them about their racial heritage has one family name on it: Obama.

    Meanwhile: Trump still hasn't proved he's not a transpecies orangutan. Where's the DNA evidence? There is lots of public demand for it - and he's a billionaire, he claims: it would be no trouble for him. (We could probably get it from the Russians, for that matter, if he gave the OK)
     
  18. Tiassa Let us not launch the boat ... Staff Member

    Messages:
    35,608

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    Click for nihilismus.

    I just needed to borrow this, for a moment, in order to reiterate a prior point↑:

    • What I wonder is what world one imagines that tropes like the question at hand should have that sort of credibility, which in turn is something of a rhetorical question, or, at least, one with a glaringly obvious answer. There are, of course, alternatives, but I still don't get why the people who aren't something might somehow so consistently fail to behave or present themselves differently than those we might otherwise agree are.​

    Or, in another iteration↑:

    • There aren't a whole lot of good analogies, but sometimes it bears reminding that the innocent ought to at least put some effort into not acting like the guilty.​

    And even more bluntly:

    • People will take you seriously on one point; sometimes it bears reminding that the innocent ought to at least put some effort into not acting like the guilty.​

    I would suggest the "concern troll" routine, as such, probably isn't working out as well as planned.

    Did you ever notice that thing people do a lot around here by which they don't really seem to have a clue of their own, so they seem to build their argument as they go along according to what people tell them?

    Consider, please:

    Is this because a bunch of magagagas are finding out they have nonwhite and Jewish genes? (#8↑)

    I know, it's kind of a dumb joke, except it also has this really weird niche in the zeitgeist; and, yes, it really does feel like has to do with ethnicity-obsessed customers finding out, for instance, that one of the particular reasons she married her husband turns out to be untrue, and isn't that funny and how charming can life be. But I hit it again some posts later—

    • Honestly, that's what it sounds like out in the world. We have, in recent times, witnessed a weird reversal: Once upon a time the racist complaint was that people were "colored", or some such; now the racist complaint is that they're not "colored" enough. Meanwhile, it happens to be true that many white supremacists are unhappy with their DNA results↱ (#34↑)

    —complete with the link to the article about white supremacists unhappy with their genetic results. Our neighbor never really did respond to those points about supremacists and their genes, but he certainly wants to try to play the point to his favor (#49↑, #72↑).

    I don't really know what to make of this thing where it looks like people are trying to learn about the issues they purport to advocate by fumbling around in the dark and then trying to build a stand-in knowledge set from responses. I mean, that's not really what is happening, right? Still, the part where he pretty much ignores the obvious—e.g., what good would it do?—in order to roll through messaging is strange enough; there is still a strange question about offering bizarre comparisons like HIV, and what is up with the bizarre formulations like:

    "If Warren had made statements that implied a connection with a crime" (#15↑)

    "If Warren had made the claim that she was HIV positive based solely on a rumor that a former boyfriend had also tested positive for the virus" (#49)

    The one either ignores or presupposes the underlying accusations of fraud, while the other is simply ... uh ... ¿say qué huh? ... and ... and ... young earth creationism (#66↑)?

    No, really, what? If I thought the formulations about criminality and HIV were odd—

    • "If I had made a public claim of being HIV positive, wouldn't it be rationally supposed that I intended the claim to be true? And for the sake of rationality, wouldn't I be obliged to publicly offer any supporting evidence? So yes, if I truly wanted the public to believe I was HIV positive, I would post it on bathroom stalls and public forums." (ibid)

    —the leap from blood tests to—

    "What if she were a flat earther or proponent of young earth creationism, would those views matter?"

    —is such utter balderdash that, really, it should not require the bit where Capracus compares Elizabeth Warren to a boasting sex predator—

    —before we accept that, yes, this does seem to really be what it looks like.
     
  19. sculptor Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,438
    (wildguessdujour)
    We will never know if Senator Warren is or is not part native american.
    So, those who would talk of it use it as a foil for other (political?) agendas.

    (justaguess)

    Let us not let ignorance divide us.
    Let us unite in our shared ignorance and then expand that so derived unity for better things.
     
  20. Capracus Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,040
    Who is seriously asking? Are you saying the overwhelming certainty of Trump’s identity as a human being is comparable to Warren’s more questionable identity as an American Indian? The issue of Trumps status as a billionaire is more comparable to Warren’s identity as Indian.
    I compared Warren’s apparent willingness to maintain her ignorance about her ancestry to that of creationists, flat earthers, and any other philosophically compromised individual who think limited knowledge trumps greater knowledge.

    Don’t want to know about the origin of life on Earth? Don’t study evolutionary biology.

    Don’t want to know about planetary development? Don’t study astrophysics.

    Don’t want to know your HIV status? Don’t get tested.

    Don’t want to confirm your ancestry? Don’t engage in genealogic research and DNA testing.

    Want to remain ignorant? Do all of the above.
    She’s honest and forthright about maintaining her ignorance. Do you consider that a desirable trait?
    Apparently you both share a like affinity for ignorance.
    Recording first hand experiences? As in kept a record of what various family members said about their ancestry? If that occurred it could be considered an element of research if it was done with the intention of further analysis, but simply recording events isn’t research. To my knowledge Warren has made no statements regarding recording her firsthand experiences, only to recalling family stories in relation to her ancestry.

    "I know who I am because of what my mother and my father told me, what my grandmother and my grandfather told me, what all my aunts and uncles told me and my brothers," she said. "It's a part of who I am and no one's ever going to take that away."

    https://www.usatoday.com/story/news...t-theres-some-wiggle-room-comments/414570002/

    Research? I don’t need to do no stinking research. I know everything about everything from listening to family stories and watching reality TV.
    If there wasn’t some element of concern on either side of the issue there would be no point in discussing it. So I’ll continue as the concerned troll, and you can continue as the ignorant variety.
    No, they research their ancestry because they themselves want to know about it, and they release it to the public because they realize the demand exists there as well. Now people like you, Tiassa, Bells, and billvon can advocate that people not advance their understanding of ancestry just to spite some racist imbeciles, but that just makes the world a more ignorant place, a place more fitting for racists and imbeciles.
    Those horrible racist geneologists.

    Pedigree charts , sometimes called “Ancestor” or “Lineage” Charts, typically have space for four or five generations (parents, grandparents, and great-grandparents.) There is space for full names, dates and places of birth, marriage, and death. See the example at the right. Ancestral lines can continue onto other charts. Some pedigree charts display fewer generations for simplicity and, in doing so, allow plenty of room to include whatever researchers may value most; ancestor portraits, ancestors' siblings in birth order, source information, or customized compiler comments to aid the other researchers in verification or overcoming their next brick wall relative. You may print or download a blank pedigree chart.

    https://www.familysearch.org/wiki/en/Use_Appropriate_Forms#Pedigree_Chart

    Warren has a host of living genetic relatives to do investigation and testing on, any additional work done can only improve the understanding of her family history. Again, you want your acquisition of knowledge determined by racists and imbeciles?
    Michelle Obama was called an ape in heels, and she has the DNA evidence to the contrary. Should she take the offending woman seriously and sue for libel?
     
    Last edited: Mar 18, 2018
    sculptor likes this.
  21. sculptor Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,438
    DNA testing:
    anecdote:
    It seems that much of the dna testing offered to the general public is questionable on a good day and worse the rest of the time.
    more anecdote:
    In my youth I had thought that my father was irish(that's what mom thought) and she was Frisian and german
    and then
    an older 1/2 brother decided to do a genealogy
    and discovered
    That we ain't irish---------our fathers ancestor was Scot, and immigrated to america in the mid 1600s
    ok so not irish -------curious
    and then my one son decided to find out more about his ancestors and had a dna test done
    OK---according to family lore he should have been part irish scot part german, part italian
    which, indeed was what his dna test reported
    seemed reasonable
    and then
    his mother and I decided to go ahead and have our's tested
    She was assumed to be 1/2 sicilian. 1/4 neopolitan-italian and 1/4 american mutt.
    and we seemed to be 2 people different from our assumed identities as/per family lore and as/per our son's test.
    My test came back 57% english and north western european(german frisian-etc.) and east european (57% of family lore went right out the window)
    Hers came back Greek and middle eastern
    --------------------------
    I have no faith in the accuracy of the test done by MyHeritage
    .................................

    Ignorance is bliss?
    I was actually quite content(call it happy) "knowing" that I was 1/2 irish, 1/4 frisian, and 1/4 german.
    Would you call that bliss?
    Now, I am just confused, less content, less assured of my ancestry.
    damn
    damn
    damn
    I knew that that football shaped paper thing hanging in a tree was full of paper wasps, but i hadda go and poke it with a stick anyway.

    ...............................................
    What I would recommend:
    Lizzy should most likely hang on to her blissful ignorance/family-lore as long as possible.
     
    Last edited: Mar 18, 2018
  22. Bells Staff Member

    Messages:
    22,823
    And you still haven't explained why she needs to do a DNA test to prove her ancestry...

    Put another way..

    Why don't you believe that she has Cherokee ancestry to the point where you and your ilk demand a DNA test? And why is it important that she proves just her Cherokee ancestry, exactly? Why is no one demanding DNA evidence of her European ancestry?

    Did you demand the same thing of Bill Clinton who claimed his grandmother was 1/4 Cherokee?

    How about Johnny Depp?

    My great grandmother was quite a bit of Native American, she grew up Cherokee or maybe Creek Indian. Makes sense in terms of coming from Kentucky, which is rife with Cherokee and Creek.​

    Who uses his family stories to get roles as a Native American.

    Do you doubt Winston Churchill's claim that he was part Native American from his American mother's side?

    I mean, the list could go on and on..
    She recounted a story passed down through her family. That's it.

    For some bizarre reason, people chose to disbelieve her and blew it completely out of proportion for the sake of politics. Put simply, you all seem more concerned about her ancestry than she is. Why is that?

    More to the point, she doesn't actually owe you or anyone any explanation about her ancestry. You do get that, right? The only thing that matters is that she is a citizen for the purpose of the being a Senator. That's it. Her 'racial' history has no bearing on her job or role in politics and it is certainly not anyone's business.

    So why don't you demand one now from their offspring? You know, since we are now delving into the realm of expecting people to have DNA tests with a form of re-implementation of the 1 drop rule.

    You seem more invested into her family tree than she is.

    Why is that?

    She's happy with her ancestry as she knows it to be. Why do you have a problem with that?

    And?

    She is under no obligation to have a DNA test because people like you seem obsessed with her ancestry, way more than should be comfortable or a passing interest and way way more than she is.

    Just because other people released information about their ancestry does not mean that she has to and I'll ask again, why is no one demanding she prove she has European ancestry and from where, but just Cherokee?

    Why is the Cherokee so important to you?
    Is that what I said? No. It is not. Why are you twisting what I said to be something else entirely?

    And you whine about reading comprehension....

    It was actually her political opponent who focused on her ancestry and she was forced to respond by stating that this was what was handed down in her family by way of stories and left it there. But people such as yourself seem to be focused entirely on her "racial" ancestry. Why? Is it because you want to know if she's 100% European or something?
    Well your obsession with her 'racial' heritage is your problem, not hers.
    You can be as unhappy that she's not swabbing her cheek for people like you to pore over her DNA results to see if she not entirely European ancestry, because apparently this matters a lot to you for some weird and bizarre reason that would take 100 pages to decipher through..

    And she isn't ignorant of her family's history. She seems to know it quite well.
    You compared having a DNA test to determine if one has Native American ancestry with HIV and public interest for health reasons and you are asking me what is wrong with me?

    And I haven't said anything about people who are HIV positive. Why are you suggesting that I did?
    She actually isn't promoting anything about her ancestry. She answers questions when asked and leaves it at that. You and your fellow MAGA hat wearers are the one's with a bee up your backside about her "racial" background. Says more about you than her, to be honest.
    She has no reason to do the DNA test. Don't you get that yet? I mean shit dude, this is getting ridiculous.

    You are sitting in an online forum, whining that a white woman is refusing to do a DNA test to see if she has Cherokee ancestry. Do you realise how you are coming across? At all? I mean, everyone has been dropping subtle hints. Hasn't it sunk in yet?

    If people want to do DNA tests to check for their ancestry, great! They, like Warren, are under no obligation to do so. They chose to do so because they are possibly unsure or want to learn more. Warren is obviously happy with what she knows of her family. You are the one wringing your hands over her ancestry. Not her.
     
  23. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    27,408
    So what's Trump's problem? Why the reluctance? C'mon - let's see a chorus of demands for his DNA analysis to be revealed in public. From you.
    Nobody's "seriously" asking about any of this stupid shit. It's not a serious matter.
    Serious would be tax returns.

    The demands directed at Trump are more "significant" than those directed at Warren, because the question bears directly on his qualifications for office. The fact that the entire matter is slapstick idiocy good for nothing but comedy routines on late night TV is apparently no barrier for you guys, and the rest of the world has to deal with you guys, so - - - - - .
    We noticed.
    And that identifies you as a frog in the swamp of fools who keep electing people like Trump. In this case, the specifically scientific area of ignorance featured is your incomprehension of the role of DNA testing - how it works, what you can learn thereby, etc. Your knowledge is - as you put it - "limited". Your obsessions are highlighted. You actually believe that Warren can determine the tribal identity of her fifth generation biological grandparent in this fashion, and should tell you about her findings when she has done so.
    Warren's ignorance is not the issue. Yours is. It's you and your imbecile racist buddies who want to be informed about Warren's DNA, which is none of your business.
    You mean "Yes". Exactly as I described. Like this:
    Warren's personal interest in her own ancestry has nothing to do with the imbecile, racist obsessions of the wingnut Republican core.
    Hold that thought.
    Realize what, exactly, is the "element of concern" on "the other side" - the reason the entire rest of the population is worried about you guys.
    When it has sunk in, repent of this wickedness.
     

Share This Page