Elizabeth Warren claims Michael Brown was "murdered"

[Derec]

Since my wife turned sixty, she gets $500 per year from the tribe from their elder fund. The vast majority of tribal funds go to the community for health and welfare care and infrastructure.

See. Being classified as "Indian" comes with tangible benefits.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

No one knew, because it sure isn't obvious by looking at her or by her name, that she had made any claims to NA ancestry or that it was her family legend.

It's BS to say that nobody knew since she listed "American Indian" as her race on her Texas bar card.

This is a private card that people don't normally see. You might use it to get in a courthouse earlier than the line, but you wouldn't publicize the card itself. You might publicize you are a member of the bar, but not the card with your address and phone number on it.

By the way, since she put her race as American Indian and the card is generally private, it shows she believed she was at least "1/16th" Cherokee. She was being true to herself, even if her actual NA ancestor was possibly further back.

 

[Derec]

This is a private card that people don't normally see. You might use it to get in a courthouse earlier than the line, but you wouldn't publicize the card itself. You might publicize you are a member of the bar, but not the card with your address and phone number on it.

By the way, since she put her race as American Indian and the card is generally private, it shows she believed she was at least "1/16th" Cherokee. She was being true to herself, even if her actual NA ancestor was possibly further back.

It disproves the claim that "nobody knew". Private does not mean secret. It also shows her willingness to self-identify as "Indian".
Also even if she was 1/16 Cherokee it doesn't justify putting "American Indian" as your race. She would be 15/16 not "American Indian".

 

[ZiprHead]

Since my wife turned sixty, she gets $500 per year from the tribe from their elder fund. The vast majority of tribal funds go to the community for health and welfare care and infrastructure.

See. Being classified as "Indian" comes with tangible benefits.

They invested in a casino and now enjoy the profits for their own use. What's wrong with that.

 

[Derec]

They invested in a casino and now enjoy the profits for their own use. What's wrong with that.

That ability to open a casino is a racial monopoly.

 

[ZiprHead]

They invested in a casino and now enjoy the profits for their own use. What's wrong with that.

That ability to open a casino is a racial monopoly.

There's plenty of casinos in Nevada that aren't owned by indians.

 

[Derec]

There's plenty of casinos in Nevada that aren't owned by indians.

I know. But in states like California or North Carolina or Connecticut only Indian tribes are allowed by law to own casinos. I.e. a racial monopoly.
I wonder if 1/1024 is enough to claim casino revenues. Hey, maybe I should try a DNA test! I may have a slight genetic connection from before Indians left the Eurasian landmass.

 

[ZiprHead]

There's plenty of casinos in Nevada that aren't owned by indians.

I know. But in states like California or North Carolina or Connecticut only Indian tribes are allowed by law to own casinos. I.e. a racial monopoly.
I wonder if 1/1024 is enough to claim casino revenues. Hey, maybe I should try a DNA test! I may have a slight genetic connection from before Indians left the Eurasian landmass.

Maybe you should take that up with California, North Carolina or Connecticut instead of blaming indians.

You may want to be wary of a DNA test. You may find you are far more closely related to Nazis.

 

[Derec]

Maybe you should take that up with California, North Carolina or Connecticut instead of blaming indians.

And federal government, who enabled the nonsense in the first place by passing the Indian Gaming Act in the first place.

You may want to be wary of a DNA test. You may find you are far more closely related to Nazis.

There is nothing Naziesque about not wanting one racial group to be legally privileged over others. In fact, it's the very opposite.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

This is a private card that people don't normally see. You might use it to get in a courthouse earlier than the line, but you wouldn't publicize the card itself. You might publicize you are a member of the bar, but not the card with your address and phone number on it.

By the way, since she put her race as American Indian and the card is generally private, it shows she believed she was at least "1/16th" Cherokee. She was being true to herself, even if her actual NA ancestor was possibly further back.

It disproves the claim that "nobody knew". Private does not mean secret.

Why are right-wingers so literal? Obviously, you could have just said her parents knew she was part NA, if it was literal. Lol

It also shows her willingness to self-identify as "Indian".
Also even if she was 1/16 Cherokee it doesn't justify putting "American Indian" as your race. She would be 15/16 not "American Indian".

Tribal law of East Cherokees allows 1/16th to get tribal membership.

 

[laughing dog]

Your evidence is a conflation of correlation with causation. If that is all you have, then while you entitled to your misogynistic opinions but no one else has to accept them as fact.

I am not conflating anything. I am merely aware of the reality of so-called "affirmative action" in contemporary academia.

No, your "awareness" is not a substantiation of what actually happened. You are conflating correlation with causation without any actual evidence in this case that there is causation.

We have had many threads where you, Toni et al defend gender and racial preferences in academia ad nauseam. But now you do not even want to acknowledge they exist. Curious.

Asking for such evidence is not even close to denying that there a racial preferences. It is asking for evidence that there was a racial preference. You have not provided any actual evidence that Ms. Warren was hired because of her claims of ethnicity. Please stop babbling idiotic red herrings and produce actual evidence to support your claims or acknowledge that you are pushing your opinion not fact.

 

[Gun Nut]

Asking for such evidence is not even close to denying that there a racial preferences. It is asking for evidence that there was a racial preference. You have not provided any actual evidence that Ms. Warren was hired because of her claims of ethnicity. Please stop babbling idiotic red herrings and produce actual evidence to support your claims or acknowledge that you are pushing your opinion not fact.

Derec provided this on page 7 in response to you, which, in my opinion, supports his position (if authentic):

Exactly what benefits did she get?

Teaching job at Harvard.

It seems dishonest to reject that a statement from an (allegedly) authoritative source about how an institution of that type gains extra benefit from having a "woman of color" on the team. It's also hard to accept the idea that the institution blatantly disregarded such a benefit in their hiring process, to the detriment of their own potential gains.

 

[Politesse]

Derec provided this on page 7 in response to you, which, in my opinion, supports his position (if authentic):

Teaching job at Harvard.

It seems dishonest to reject that a statement from an (allegedly) authoritative source about how an institution of that type gains extra benefit from having a "woman of color" on the team. It's also hard to accept the idea that the institution blatantly disregarded such a benefit in their hiring process, to the detriment of their own potential gains.

You're citing the fact that Harvard had no actual women of color on their staff in 1995 as proof that women of color were preferentially hired at Harvard in 1995? That's... bold. If they are trying to hire native women at Harvard they are failing badly, as none of their faculty past or present fit that description unless Warren herself is counted as one.

They hired their first non-white women to a dean position last year. It's bizarre to me that conservatives think Harvard, Yale, etc., the very institutions that created and defended American perspectives on racial inferiority in the first place, suddenly turned into liberal bastions at the end of the Cold War. The Ivy League schools are not now and never have been, politically liberal in their sympathies. They are, and always have been, pro-capitalist hotbeds of elite white supremacy.

 

[Gun Nut]

Derec provided this on page 7 in response to you, which, in my opinion, supports his position (if authentic):

Teaching job at Harvard.

It seems dishonest to reject that a statement from an (allegedly) authoritative source about how an institution of that type gains extra benefit from having a "woman of color" on the team. It's also hard to accept the idea that the institution blatantly disregarded such a benefit in their hiring process, to the detriment of their own potential gains.

You're citing the fact that Harvard had no actual women of color on their staff in 1995 as proof that women of color were preferentially hired at Harvard in 1995? That's... bold. If they are trying to hire native women at Harvard they are failing badly, as none of their faculty past or present fit that description unless Warren herself is counted as one.

They hired their first non-white women to a dean position last year. It's bizarre to me that conservatives think Harvard, Yale, etc., the very institutions that created and defended American perspectives on racial inferiority in the first place, suddenly turned into liberal bastions at the end of the Cold War. The Ivy League schools are not now and never have been, politically liberal in their sympathies. They are, and always have been, pro-capitalist hotbeds of elite white supremacy.

That's an... interesting... take on the meaning of the article... it plainly says that entities of this sort benefit from having women of color on staff, and you are using it to say she received no benefit by claiming to be a woman of color. That they had none and recognize that they need some speaks to Derec's point, not the torchered counterposition you are presenting.

 

[Politesse]

You're citing the fact that Harvard had no actual women of color on their staff in 1995 as proof that women of color were preferentially hired at Harvard in 1995? That's... bold. If they are trying to hire native women at Harvard they are failing badly, as none of their faculty past or present fit that description unless Warren herself is counted as one.

They hired their first non-white women to a dean position last year. It's bizarre to me that conservatives think Harvard, Yale, etc., the very institutions that created and defended American perspectives on racial inferiority in the first place, suddenly turned into liberal bastions at the end of the Cold War. The Ivy League schools are not now and never have been, politically liberal in their sympathies. They are, and always have been, pro-capitalist hotbeds of elite white supremacy.

That's an... interesting... take on the meaning of the article... it plainly says that entities of this sort benefit from having women of color on staff, and you are using it to say she received no benefit by claiming to be a woman of color. That they had none and recognize that they need some speaks to Derec's point, not the torchered counterposition you are presenting.

What possible benefit could Warren possibly have derived from feigning indigeneity to a historically racist college that has never, to this day, had any Native American women on its staff?

 

[Gun Nut]

You're citing the fact that Harvard had no actual women of color on their staff in 1995 as proof that women of color were preferentially hired at Harvard in 1995? That's... bold. If they are trying to hire native women at Harvard they are failing badly, as none of their faculty past or present fit that description unless Warren herself is counted as one.

They hired their first non-white women to a dean position last year. It's bizarre to me that conservatives think Harvard, Yale, etc., the very institutions that created and defended American perspectives on racial inferiority in the first place, suddenly turned into liberal bastions at the end of the Cold War. The Ivy League schools are not now and never have been, politically liberal in their sympathies. They are, and always have been, pro-capitalist hotbeds of elite white supremacy.

That's an... interesting... take on the meaning of the article... it plainly says that entities of this sort benefit from having women of color on staff, and you are using it to say she received no benefit by claiming to be a woman of color. That they had none and recognize that they need some speaks to Derec's point, not the torchered counterposition you are presenting.

What possible benefit could Warren possibly have derived from feigning indigeneity to a historically racist college that has never, to this day, had any Native American women on its staff?

The Financial benefit of a salary
The Personal benefit of success
The Professional benefit of "being the first" in her industry.
The Public benefit of contributing to the changing of a racist dynamic

 

[Derec]

Why are right-wingers so literal? Obviously, you could have just said her parents knew she was part NA, if it was literal. Lol

I am neither a "right winger" nor am I being literal. If she is using "American Indian" as her race on her registration card on her bar application, plenty of people would have seen it. Also, it is unlikely that she listed her race as "American Indian" as her race for the TX bar, but did not self-identify as Indian anywhere else.

Tribal law of East Cherokees allows 1/16th to get tribal membership.

Sweet. Now I just need a bogus story about a great-greatgrandmother (=1/16) having high cheek bones and I too can enjoy that sweet, sweet Harrah's money.

 

[Derec]

No, your "awareness" is not a substantiation of what actually happened. You are conflating correlation with causation without any actual evidence in this case that there is causation.

I have provided evidence for EW using "American Indian" as her race professionally. I have also provided evidence that Harvard sought to hire a "woman of color" and that EW was listed as such by them. What more do you need? It may not prove it (and "proof is just for math and liquor) there is more than enough evidence to draw an inference, which is enough in the real world.

It is incredibly naive to think that Harvard would not have been aware of EW self-identifying as "American Indian". However, it seems you will reject any connection unless Harvard comes out and admits that they hired EW in part because she was considered a "woman of color".

 

[abaddon]

In a world where Trump is POTUS, the dirt-digging on Dem candidates should have to turn up rape or murder to have significance.

 

[Derec]

One more thing about Michael "OD" Brown, the OG of the #BLM movement. I read this story a few days ago and what Dorian Johnson had to say about what led to the robbery and the shooting is really interesting.

Dorian Johnson, witness to the Ferguson shooting, sticks by his story

During one of those sessions, in July 2014, Brown and Johnson hit it off, discussing their love of music and Brown’s newfound exploration of Christianity.

Maybe that's where that preacher got the ridiculous idea to say that Brown was "spreading the word of Jesus Christ" and was a prophet. LMAO!

Johnson, then 22, could tell that the younger Brown was looking for someone to talk to. But their only other substantive conversation came on Aug. 9, the day of the shooting.
In details never before shared publicly, Johnson said Brown showed up at his apartment at 2 a.m., wanting to talk.
Brown told Johnson that his grandmother and stepmother were both sick, Johnson recalled, and that Brown had a premonition that he could heal them through prayer. But his friends and family wouldn’t listen: The previous afternoon, in what would be their final conversation, Brown’s father hung up on him.

This would have been right after the night time visit to the convenience store he would rob the next day, the encounter Jason Pollock made so much about.
Also, if Brown Sr. hung up on Jr. the last time they spoke before his death, I can't imagine the guilt he feels. Is it why he is overcompensating now with all the carrying on and calling for investigation to be reopened?

Johnson went inside to get dressed but fell asleep instead. Hours later, he ran into Brown in the parking lot and apologetically offered to continue the conversation.

This just shows that the choice to cast Lakeith Stanfield as Dorian Johnson in that NY Times reenactment was right on.

According to Johnson, Brown was convinced that he was in the midst of a spiritual epiphany and that strange things were happening all around him. At one point, Brown walked into the middle of traffic on West Florissant Avenue. Cars whizzed by from both directions but miraculously avoided hitting him.
“He had a look like ‘I told you,’ ” Johnson recalled. “I had an eerie feeling the whole time we were walking.”

According to DJ, Brown behaved very strangely. Perhaps due to drug use or maybe undiagnosed mental illness. Schizophrenia for example, usually first manifests around the age MB was when he died, so that would not be unusual.

The clerk threatened to call the police, and the pair left the shop. Johnson said he was shocked by Brown’s behavior.
“He wasn’t in a mindstate of not knowing what he was doing. He was in a mindstate of trying to figure out what was happening to him,” Johnson said. “He was just trying to find understanding.”

Hmmm.