Trump calls Warren "Pocahontas" at an event honoring native American veterans

[dismal]

Trump's so pleased by his wit, it never occurs to him that people around might not think it as witty as he does. So he would never consider it offensive, because to him, it was inclusive, he thought he was honoring them by being relaxed and fun loving, giving 'em the warm and fuzzy Donald.

I think it occurs to him.

It's a neat trick to say something crude followed by the word "but" followed by a nice sentiment, and he does it quite a lot. Saying "Pocahontas" even after he's been told before that it's offensive, and then very immediately following it up with "but I like YOU!" is a great example of his trick. He does it so, when people point out he said something mean, he can say "No! didn't you hear that I said something nice!"

However much or little conscious awareness goes into it, the "get out of jail free" card that he always includes just in case his wit hurts someone shows he's got some awareness that his "wit" is offensive.

The word "Pocahontas" is not inherently offensive. There's even a Disney movie with that title.

While you could argue dismissively calling an Native American woman "Pocahontas" might be offensive, that's not what Trump did. He called a white woman who claimed to be Native American "Pocahontas" to make fun of her for being a liar.

[YOUTUBE]g8Y6JhOVYqw[/YOUTUBE]

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Trump's so pleased by his wit, it never occurs to him that people around might not think it as witty as he does. So he would never consider it offensive, because to him, it was inclusive, he thought he was honoring them by being relaxed and fun loving, giving 'em the warm and fuzzy Donald.

I think it occurs to him.

It's a neat trick to say something crude followed by the word "but" followed by a nice sentiment, and he does it quite a lot. Saying "Pocahontas" even after he's been told before that it's offensive, and then very immediately following it up with "but I like YOU!" is a great example of his trick. He does it so, when people point out he said something mean, he can say "No! didn't you hear that I said something nice!"

However much or little conscious awareness goes into it, the "get out of jail free" card that he always includes just in case his wit hurts someone shows he's got some awareness that his "wit" is offensive.

The word "Pocahontas" is not inherently offensive. There's even a Disney movie with that title.

While you could argue dismissively calling an Native American woman "Pocahontas" might be offensive, that's not what Trump did. He called a white woman who claimed to be Native American "Pocahontas" to make fun of her for being a liar.

[YOUTUBE]g8Y6JhOVYqw[/YOUTUBE]

Being native american is a pseudoscientific legal construct such that if an ancestor some specific number of generations back was declared a tribe member even if not originally native american, then such descendant can also be declared native american. This is somewhat similar to other social constructs of race like hispanic where you can be white, black or korean but if a recent ancestor comes from a spanish-speaking country, then you are hispanic.

On the other hand, calling Elizabeth Warren "pocahontas," is simply hateful and in some sense ignorant of how non-scientific the social construct of race is. It's done with privilege and entitlement by internet trolls with limited ability to make a good argument. So, of course, Twitler the White Troll in Chief would embrace it in a room full of Native American war heroes. What a jackass.

Each day He speaks, he proves over and over that financial success doesn't come from intelligence, but is instead inherited.

 

[RavenSky]

The word "Pocahontas" is not inherently offensive. There's even a Disney movie with that title.

OK Eric.

Here's a nice fidget spinner for you.

 

[dismal]

I think it occurs to him.

It's a neat trick to say something crude followed by the word "but" followed by a nice sentiment, and he does it quite a lot. Saying "Pocahontas" even after he's been told before that it's offensive, and then very immediately following it up with "but I like YOU!" is a great example of his trick. He does it so, when people point out he said something mean, he can say "No! didn't you hear that I said something nice!"

However much or little conscious awareness goes into it, the "get out of jail free" card that he always includes just in case his wit hurts someone shows he's got some awareness that his "wit" is offensive.

The word "Pocahontas" is not inherently offensive. There's even a Disney movie with that title.

While you could argue dismissively calling an Native American woman "Pocahontas" might be offensive, that's not what Trump did. He called a white woman who claimed to be Native American "Pocahontas" to make fun of her for being a liar.

[YOUTUBE]g8Y6JhOVYqw[/YOUTUBE]

Being native american is a pseudoscientific legal construct such that if an ancestor some specific number of generations back was declared a tribe member even if not originally native american, then such descendant can also be declared native american. This is somewhat similar to other social constructs of race like hispanic where you can be white, black or korean but if a recent ancestor comes from a spanish-speaking country, then you are hispanic.

On the other hand, calling Elizabeth Warren "pocahontas," is simply hateful and in some sense ignorant of how non-scientific the social construct of race is. It's done with privilege and entitlement by internet trolls with limited ability to make a good argument. So, of course, Twitler the White Troll in Chief would embrace it in a room full of Native American war heroes. What a jackass.

Each day He speaks, he proves over and over that financial success doesn't come from intelligence, but is instead inherited.

Elizabeth Warren has no more evidence she is Native American than she is Napoleon.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Elizabeth Warren has no more evidence she is Native American than she is Napoleon.

Coming from the guy who thought Kaepernick was White because his first name is Colin, your opinion really means a lot to everyone.

 

[whollygoats]

Elizabeth Warren has no more evidence she is Native American than she is Napoleon.

Coming from the guy who thought Kaepernick was White because his first name is Colin, your opinion really means a lot to everyone.

LOL.

And then there is the 'butwhatabout' the Trumps claiming to be of Swedish extraction during the 1940s and 1950s? Y'know, back when it wasn't the best PR to be German...So, Trump and his family lied about their heritage in order to advance their business interests.

Just call him 'Olaf'.

 

[Malintent]

Trump's so pleased by his wit, it never occurs to him that people around might not think it as witty as he does. So he would never consider it offensive, because to him, it was inclusive, he thought he was honoring them by being relaxed and fun loving, giving 'em the warm and fuzzy Donald.

he is about as witty as a four year old saying, "doody", and then laughing hysterically at their own "wit".

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Elizabeth Warren has no more evidence she is Native American than she is Napoleon.

Coming from the guy who thought Kaepernick was White because his first name is Colin, your opinion really means a lot to everyone.

LOL.

And then there is the 'butwhatabout' the Trumps claiming to be of Swedish extraction during the 1940s and 1950s? Y'know, back when it wasn't the best PR to be German...So, Trump and his family lied about their heritage in order to advance their business interests.

Just call him 'Olaf'.

Wow, I wasn't aware of that. Looked it up:

The myth made it into Donald Trump’s 1987 book The Art of the Deal. In a section detailing his family history, he included that his grandfather “came from Sweden as a child.” Trump, surprisingly, was apparently loathe to stretch the facts of his family heritage.

Read more: https://forward.com/news/national/3...german-roots-especially-when-selling-to-jews/

As someone whose grandfather actually did come from Sweden, I'm not super offended by this. It just looks so typical. If there's one thing the Trump family knows how to do--it's lie. And then accuse everyone else of being liars much louder so everyone forgets about them.

 

[thebeave]

Hey, if Elizabeth Warren wants to identify as Native American, who are we to judge? Its how she feels inside that counts, and everyone should respect her self-identity and use the pronouns she prefers (squaw?).

 

[Toni]

The word "Pocahontas" is not inherently offensive. There's even a Disney movie with that title.

While you could argue dismissively calling an Native American woman "Pocahontas" might be offensive, that's not what Trump did. He called a white woman who claimed to be Native American "Pocahontas" to make fun of her for being a liar.

[YOUTUBE]g8Y6JhOVYqw[/YOUTUBE]

Being native american is a pseudoscientific legal construct such that if an ancestor some specific number of generations back was declared a tribe member even if not originally native american, then such descendant can also be declared native american. This is somewhat similar to other social constructs of race like hispanic where you can be white, black or korean but if a recent ancestor comes from a spanish-speaking country, then you are hispanic.

On the other hand, calling Elizabeth Warren "pocahontas," is simply hateful and in some sense ignorant of how non-scientific the social construct of race is. It's done with privilege and entitlement by internet trolls with limited ability to make a good argument. So, of course, Twitler the White Troll in Chief would embrace it in a room full of Native American war heroes. What a jackass.

Each day He speaks, he proves over and over that financial success doesn't come from intelligence, but is instead inherited.

Elizabeth Warren has no more evidence she is Native American than she is Napoleon.

Nor did she ever claim more than this was the family lore she grew up with. Which is precisely how most of us learn about our heritage. It wasn't until ancestry.com came along that I learned one of my grandmother's more colorful tales about her ancestors was in fact true. Or at least ancestry dot com true.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Nor did she ever claim more than this was the family lore she grew up with. Which is precisely how most of us learn about our heritage. It wasn't until ancestry.com came along that I learned one of my grandmother's more colorful tales about her ancestors was in fact true. Or at least ancestry dot com true.

You're right. Our access now to info and methods is far more convenient than it was back then when she had made these claims based on learning from her mother and grandmother. I will add that from my mother and grandmother I also learned I was part Native American. I've gotten mixed results from trying to confirm this these days and I am not completely confident on what is the truth, but some decades ago, I relied entirely on my grandmother's oral history of family heritage.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

It was very clumsy and boorish the way Trump engaged in call out culture by calling out Warren for her phony claims. I learned from the SJWs that call out culture is a good thing and you should always call out people on their racism, such as false claims of ethnic ancestry. But there was a better way to do it than the way he did, which is why there is so much tone policing going on now.

 

[whollygoats]

Before the internet, it took a determined CDO-type relative being sent to Salt Lake City.

 

[Elixir]

It was very clumsy and boorish the way Trump engaged in call out culture by calling out Warren for her phony claims.

She learned from the best - Olaf himself.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

... phony claims....

Can you prove that she does not have an ancestor who had tribal affiliation?

 

[Tom Sawyer]

... phony claims....

Can you prove that she does not have an ancestor who had tribal affiliation?

Since when is it incumbent on others to prove a negative?

If Warren made a claim and others challenge the authenticity of her claim, then the onus is on her to back up the claim. That's how claims work.

 

[Horatio Parker]

Warren says it's family tradition that one of her ancestors was Cherokee.

She's from Oklahoma, and that's not an unusual family tradition there. Family traditions are often wrong, however. None of her ancestors are in the tribal registers, but otoh tribal registers are not complete. It would be necessary for her to claim
legal status as native, which she's not.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

... phony claims....

Can you prove that she does not have an ancestor who had tribal affiliation?

Since when is it incumbent on others to prove a negative?

Since always.* The default assumption of a thing that is logically possible and empirically viable is agnosticism, not that it is untrue or true.

I am agnostic on whether I am part Native American myself.

If Warren made a claim and others challenge the authenticity of her claim, then the onus is on her to back up the claim. That's how claims work.

Warren is not here to answer that. I claim I don't know. Jason claims she has lied.

*Wiki

Proving a negative[edit]
A negative claim is a colloquialism for an affirmative claim that asserts the non-existence or exclusion of something.[13] Saying "You cannot prove a negative" is a pseudologic because there are many proofs that substantiate negative claims in mathematics, science, and economics including Arrow's impossibility theorem. There can be multiple claims within a debate. Nevertheless, whoever makes a claim carries the burden of proof regardless of positive or negative content in the claim.

A negative claim may or may not exist as a counterpoint to a previous claim. A proof of impossibility or an evidence of absence argument are typical methods to fulfill the burden of proof for a negative claim.[13][14]

 

[Tom Sawyer]

Can you prove that she does not have an ancestor who had tribal affiliation?

Since when is it incumbent on others to prove a negative?

Since always. The default assumption of a thing that is logically possible and empirically viable is agnosticism, not that it is untrue or true.

I am agnostic on whether I am part Native American myself.

If Warren made a claim and others challenge the authenticity of her claim, then the onus is on her to back up the claim. That's how claims work.

Warren is not here to answer that. I claim I don't know. Jason claims she has lied.

Well, that sounds absolutely no different from the whole "Well, if you can't PROVE God doesn't exist, you can't be an atheist" thing.

There's no issue in calling bullshit on a claim that someone isn't willing or able to back up.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Since when is it incumbent on others to prove a negative?

Since always. The default assumption of a thing that is logically possible and empirically viable is agnosticism, not that it is untrue or true.

I am agnostic on whether I am part Native American myself.

If Warren made a claim and others challenge the authenticity of her claim, then the onus is on her to back up the claim. That's how claims work.

Warren is not here to answer that. I claim I don't know. Jason claims she has lied.

Well, that sounds absolutely no different from the whole "Well, if you can't PROVE God doesn't exist, you can't be an atheist" thing.

Are you trying to win an argument by making something sound like a religious argument when in fact it isn't?

There doesn't exist an integer that is both odd and even. A mathematical proof could be given. Therefore, someone can prove a negative.

Likewise, excellent arguments can disprove the existence of gods that have defined characteristics. Rhetorical, philosophical arguments can be made for the non-existence of a god as well.

We're not talking gods, but instead a person who exists and many other persons who have Native American heritage, some of whom do not have a good paper trail but instead family lore...some of whom could have recent enough ancestors that if they did a DNA test something might show up but others who if they did a DNA test, the confirmation attempt may get lost in noise or fail due to shortcomings of an algorithm and data available. And some of whom have family stories but the stories are false.

There's no issue in calling bullshit on a claim that someone isn't willing or able to back up.

Warren is not here so she cannot back it up. This is like if Obama said "ObamaCare is good," and Jason responded with "Obama made a phony claim." I might declare "I don't know." But you'd not put any burden on Jason at all for calling Obama a liar. You are wrong. ANYONE making an assertion of something logically possible and plausible has a burden of proof. I've already linked Wiki on this topic and I've already given examples above of negative proofs.