What's new
By:
Filters

Culturally Insensitive man bets a million dollars...

LogGrad98 said:
I'm curious what kinds of memories one would have from a single 5X+ removed great-ancestor. Nothing I have read makes it sound like she lived in any way connected to the NA community, including directly from that community.
Click to expand...
She had no real knowledge of when or where her native American Ancestry came from. She believed her family stories...

Are you even being serious?
 
Bulletproof said:
Her ****ing mom told her she had native American ancestry and she believed her ****ing mom.

Does it make sense to you yet? Or should I bust out the ****ing crayons?
Click to expand...

In our family history book, it says that we're direct descendants from William Wallace. My dad used to mention it every now and then growing up and I'm sure Ive mentioned it to close friends or gfs at one point or another. That said, I would never bring it up to my employer or allow them to list that as something that makes me special. That's just comnecting my blood to one person in some minute, mildly interesting way (if it's even true.) I couldn't imagine claiming I was a minority without knowing how, like she did (unless, I was eight - see my avatar story) Is that not odd to you?

When I see her talk about it, it's like she's living romanticized family stories that touch a nerve with her more than actuality.
 
Bulletproof said:
She had no real knowledge of when or where her native American Ancestry came from. She believed her family stories...

Are you even being serious?
Click to expand...
Are you? The claim was she wanted to find people with whom she could share her native American memories. Do vague stories you may or may not remember correctly from when you were a child qualify as memories of your shared minority heritage?

So I wanted to know what those memories might be, since that was the claim.
 
Bulletproof said:
Her ****ing mom told her she had native American ancestry and she believed her ****ing mom.

Does it make sense to you yet? Or should I bust out the ****ing crayons?
Click to expand...
Let me write this in crayon for you since that seems to be your preferred medium. The claim I was responding to was that she did not tell anyone.about it, that she wasn't publicizing it. If she wasn't then how did anyone know?

Please try to keep up. You're better than this.
 
Archie Moses said:
In our family history book, it says that we're direct descendants from William Wallace. My dad used to mention it every now and then growing up and I'm sure Ive mentioned it to close friends or gfs at one point or another. That said, I would never bring it up to my employer or allow them to list that as something that makes me special. That's just comnecting my blood to one person in some minute, mildly interesting way (if it's even true.) I couldn't imagine claiming I was a minority without knowing how, like she did (unless, I was eight - see my avatar story) Is that not odd to you?

When I see her talk about it, it's like she's living romanticized family stories that touch a nerve with her more than actuality.
Click to expand...

according to my ancestry DNA i've got 25% scandinavian from an area well known for being a viking stronghold. So i talk **** to my mates about being a viking but even at that level i still think i'm full of crap to say that. For this woman to be waving around a DNA test that shows her native american ancestry to be at a background noise level as proof of winning some bet is cringeworthy and downright embarrassing. And Trump is an offensive tool to call her Pocahontas.
 
Bulletproof said:
She had no real knowledge of when or where her native American Ancestry came from. She believed her family stories...

Are you even being serious?
Click to expand...
I've decided this whole thing is entirely pointless. For whatever reason (I'll let you guess) some people have decided to infer the most cynical motives for Elizabeth Warren's sparse mentioning of her NOW CONFIRMED native ancestry.

Before she had the DNA test the talking point on the right was that she was making the whole thing up to gain some sort of advantage. Now that she has provided a DNA test which confirms she does in fact have some Indian ancestry the goalposts have shifted. Should she have been considered a minority in her faculty directory, no. Did she gain any advantage in work or politics from it? There's no reason to believe she did.

So what the **** are we even doing here? The bad faith from the right, as though they actually give a **** about being 'politically correct' or in such a thing as 'cultural appropriation', is reaching absurd levels.
 
Zombie said:
I've decided this whole thing is entirely pointless. For whatever reason (I'll let you guess) some people have decided to infer the most cynical motives for Elizabeth Warren's sparse mentioning of her NOW CONFIRMED native ancestry.

Before she had the DNA test the talking point on the right was that she was making the whole thing up to gain some sort of advantage. Now that she has provided a DNA test which confirms she does in fact have some Indian ancestry the goalposts have shifted. Should she have been considered a minority in her faculty directory, no. Did she gain any advantage in work or politics from it? There's no reason to believe she did.

So what the **** are we even doing here? The bad faith from the right, as though they actually give a **** about being 'politically correct' or in such a thing as 'cultural appropriation', is reaching absurd levels.
Click to expand...

i think you mean NOT CONFIRMED ??
 
One Brow said:
So you say. Yet, again and again, your posts are those of a person who's a conservative but not willing to be upfront about it. It's almost as if you refuse to read websites that have a more liberal bias, like Vox (in case you have forgotten, that's exactly what you said when I posted a link to it).
Click to expand...

I've been upfront about my political beliefs, multiple times on Jazzfanz. I, 100%, have many conservatives beliefs. I don't deny that. I have many liberal beliefs too (shhh I'm down for gun control.)
I read liberal websites, every day, habitually so **** off. You don't get to say what I do or I don't. I just posted a link from one in this thread today (the verge) then changed it to a different link that answered RM's question better.

I posted a USA Today article yesterday.

The problem is, you only see what I post when it goes against your simple minded pov. It doesn't have to be left or right on everything. That's a weak mentality to have.

My take on Elizabeth Warren has nothing to do with her political affiliation. It has to do with bragging about being a Native American when you're more than likely just 1/512 Native is beyond an eyeroll and deceptive af to me. You're simply defending her because she's a liberal. If this was Trump claiming what she did, I'd bet my house you'd be at Trump's throat saying how dare he.

Another reason why I hate bipartisanship.

It makes something so obnoxiously obvious become politically biased. Smh.
 
Douchebag K said:
i think you mean NOT CONFIRMED ??
Click to expand...
No I'm pretty sure I meant exactly what I typed thanks.

Here's a little thought for you all. My quite Mormon family likes to make a big deal out of the fact that back in the 1800's our ancestors (on my mother's side) converted to the LDS church and traveled west on the Mormon trail.

This pioneer heritage is taken quite seriously and is a point of pride for them as it is for many people living in and around Utah today, and no one begrudges them their pride in it. I heard stories growing up about how we were blood relations of Mary Fielding Smith (wife of Hyrum Smith brother of the one and only Joseph Smith for our nonmormon friends ).



It's curious to me to see members of my own family crow about Elizabeth Warren's pride in her Native Ancestry which, according to her own family lore and now DNA evidence, dates back to around the same time period. Are we not all entitled to our own heritage?
 
Zombie said:
No I'm pretty sure I meant exactly what I typed thanks.

Here's a little thought for you all. My quite Mormon family likes to make a big deal out of the fact that back in the 1800's our ancestors (on my mother's side) converted to the LDS church and traveled west on the Mormon trail.

This pioneer heritage is taken quite seriously and is a point of pride for them as it is for many people living in and around Utah today, and no one begrudges them their pride in it. I heard stories growing up about how we were blood relations of Mary Fielding Smith (wife of Hyrum Smith brother of the one and only Joseph Smith for our nonmormon friends ).



It's curious to me to see members of my own family crow about Elizabeth Warren's pride in her Native Ancestry which, according to her own family lore and now DNA evidence, dates back to around the same time period. Are we not all entitled to our own heritage?
Click to expand...

not if it's 1/500th lol Common sense really
 
Douchebag K said:
according to my ancestry DNA i've got 25% scandinavian from an area well known for being a viking stronghold. So i talk **** to my mates about being a viking but even at that level i still think i'm full of crap to say that. For this woman to be waving around a DNA test that shows her native american ancestry to be at a background noise level as proof of winning some bet is cringeworthy and downright embarrassing. And Trump is an offensive tool to call her Pocahontas.
Click to expand...

She's doing it to get media attention for her presidential campaign and build an anti-Trump link. Its embarrassing but it's working. Just look at this thread. Embarrassing that it was even started, or that anyone actually cares (and they clearly do).
 
idestroyedthetoilet said:
She's doing it to get media attention for her presidential campaign and build an anti-Trump link. Its embarrassing but it's working. Just look at this thread. Embarrassing that it was even started, or that anyone actually cares (and they clearly do).
Click to expand...
Media attention for a presidential campaign a few weeks before the midterms doesn't make much sense. I think its much more likely she wanted to address this before the midterms, clear the air, and move forward so it doesn't continue to dog her during the actual presidential campaign.
 
Zombie said:
Media attention for a presidential campaign a few weeks before the midterms doesn't make much sense. I think its much more likely she wanted to address this before the midterms, clear the air, and move forward so it doesn't continue to dog her during the actual presidential campaign.
Click to expand...

It's a stunt to get her name back into everyone's brain. The other prospective candidates all got some burn during Kavanaugh now she needs some too.

Your suggestion is plausible, I suppose, but I dont see what air she needs to clear here. Are swing voters really going to care? If anything, people badmouthing her over such trivial nonsense might win her some sympathy vote and remind others how they think Trump is a bully.

Any press is good press. This is press.
 
idestroyedthetoilet said:
It's a stunt to get her name back into everyone's brain. The other prospective candidates all got some burn during Kavanaugh now she needs some too.

Your suggestion is plausible, I suppose, but I dont see what air she needs to clear here. Are swing voters really going to care? If anything, people badmouthing her over such trivial nonsense might win her some sympathy vote and remind others how they think Trump is a bully.

Any press is good press. This is press.
Click to expand...
Getting her name in peoples brains is not going to do her any good now. The presidential election is ages away and making this an issue before the midterms seems calculated to give it the least amount of long term impact. There will be plenty of other things taking it's place in the public consciousness after what most people think is the most important midterm election in a generation.

Anyone who thinks this is a winning issue for her needs their brains checked, because this is an 'issue' she can be attacked on from both the right and the left. She(hopefully for her sake) sees this as a weakness that she needs to resolve in a way that does as little damage to her presidential candidacy as possible. Now any time it's brought up she can say, look we've addressed it, I want to talk about the issues XYZ that matter to Americans. The political calculus is pretty similar to that which caused Obama to produce his birth certificate.

As for all press being good press- Come on man, you are smart enough to know that especially in politics, that's just not true.
 
Douchebag K said:
hence the 1/500th i gave her the benefit of the doubt and put it halfway
Click to expand...

You can do that. I'm not sure it makes sense to split the difference, but since that makes sense to you and is almost certainly not politically driven, keep going with that.

Three pieces of data I feel are worth consideration :

How inheritance works
https://dna-explained.com/2017/04/21/concepts-percentage-of-ancestors-dna/

One drop rule
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/One-drop_rule


Although native American citizenship has little bearing on ancestry, the current principal chief of the Cherokee nation is only 3.1% Cherokee

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_John_Baker
 
Zombie said:
Getting her name in peoples brains is not going to do her any good now. The presidential election is ages away and making this an issue before the midterms seems calculated to give it the least amount of long term impact. There will be plenty of other things taking it's place in the public consciousness after what most people think is the most important midterm election in a generation.

Anyone who thinks this is a winning issue for her needs their brains checked, because this is an 'issue' she can be attacked on from both the right and the left. She(hopefully for her sake) sees this as a weakness that she needs to resolve in a way that does as little damage to her presidential candidacy as possible. Now any time it's brought up she can say, look we've addressed it, I want to talk about the issues XYZ that matter to Americans. The political calculus is pretty similar to that which caused Obama to produce his birth certificate.

As for all press being good press- Come on man, you are smart enough to know that especially in politics, that's just not true.
Click to expand...

Agree to disagree. Presidential campaigns start years in advance. We are 2 years out. She's also forming links with journalists and most likely used this for quid pro quo with a journalist or two. Building those links. Kavanaugh is done and gone and someone had to be the first to write on the next hot topic.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top