Elizabeth Warren and Her Ancestry. Thoughts?

24567…16

Comments

  • dankind
    dankind Posts: 20,841
    PJ_Soul said:
    dankind said:
    PJ_Soul said:
    dankind said:
    Ledbetterman10 said:
    I can't believe the Dems are actually considering her as a possible 2020 candidate. And that has nothing to do with Native American Ancestry (or lack thereof). If Hillary, with all her power and money, couldn't win, how could a poor man's Hillary have a chance?
    Agreed. Another fucking fossil on the ballot. (She'll be a septuagenarian in 2020.) And I actually like love Warren, but I'd never vote for her old ass.

    I love my grandma, but I won't even get in a car that she's driving.
    If that becomes a general issue then I really will be convinced that Hillary lost because she's a woman.
    Speaking for myself: I'm not sexist; I'm ageist.

    I like Hillary, too. And I would've voted for her over her dickhead husband a thousand times over in the nineties, but not in 2016. 
    I wasn't suggesting you're a sexist. It's just that Trump was over 70 when he won the election, and his age really wasn't an issue at all for either side. So if that age suddenly becomes an issue when it's a female candidate, that would tell me it is indeed a sexist thing in general.
    Since we've sadly only had dicks running the show in the White House, I can only be informed by how much more awful those dicks have been in my lifetime when they're older dicks.

    Gender (again) sadly doesn't, nay, can't inform my opinion based on past performance running the show in the White House.
    I SAW PEARL JAM
  • PJ_Soul
    PJ_Soul Vancouver, BC Posts: 50,667
    edited October 2018
    dankind said:
    PJ_Soul said:
    dankind said:
    PJ_Soul said:
    dankind said:
    Ledbetterman10 said:
    I can't believe the Dems are actually considering her as a possible 2020 candidate. And that has nothing to do with Native American Ancestry (or lack thereof). If Hillary, with all her power and money, couldn't win, how could a poor man's Hillary have a chance?
    Agreed. Another fucking fossil on the ballot. (She'll be a septuagenarian in 2020.) And I actually like love Warren, but I'd never vote for her old ass.

    I love my grandma, but I won't even get in a car that she's driving.
    If that becomes a general issue then I really will be convinced that Hillary lost because she's a woman.
    Speaking for myself: I'm not sexist; I'm ageist.

    I like Hillary, too. And I would've voted for her over her dickhead husband a thousand times over in the nineties, but not in 2016. 
    I wasn't suggesting you're a sexist. It's just that Trump was over 70 when he won the election, and his age really wasn't an issue at all for either side. So if that age suddenly becomes an issue when it's a female candidate, that would tell me it is indeed a sexist thing in general.
    Since we've sadly only had dicks running the show in the White House, I can only be informed by how much more awful those dicks have been in my lifetime when they're older dicks.

    Gender (again) sadly doesn't, nay, can't inform my opinion based on past performance running the show in the White House.
    Well, there have been a couple young dicks too.
    Post edited by PJ_Soul on
    With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
  • dankind
    dankind Posts: 20,841
    PJ_Soul said:
    dankind said:
    PJ_Soul said:
    dankind said:
    PJ_Soul said:
    dankind said:
    Ledbetterman10 said:
    I can't believe the Dems are actually considering her as a possible 2020 candidate. And that has nothing to do with Native American Ancestry (or lack thereof). If Hillary, with all her power and money, couldn't win, how could a poor man's Hillary have a chance?
    Agreed. Another fucking fossil on the ballot. (She'll be a septuagenarian in 2020.) And I actually like love Warren, but I'd never vote for her old ass.

    I love my grandma, but I won't even get in a car that she's driving.
    If that becomes a general issue then I really will be convinced that Hillary lost because she's a woman.
    Speaking for myself: I'm not sexist; I'm ageist.

    I like Hillary, too. And I would've voted for her over her dickhead husband a thousand times over in the nineties, but not in 2016. 
    I wasn't suggesting you're a sexist. It's just that Trump was over 70 when he won the election, and his age really wasn't an issue at all for either side. So if that age suddenly becomes an issue when it's a female candidate, that would tell me it is indeed a sexist thing in general.
    Since we've sadly only had dicks running the show in the White House, I can only be informed by how much more awful those dicks have been in my lifetime when they're older dicks.

    Gender (again) sadly doesn't, nay, can't inform my opinion based on past performance running the show in the White House.
    Well, there have been a couple young dicks too.
    And, for the most part, they did better jobs than the old dicks. For the most part.
    I SAW PEARL JAM
  • PJ_Soul
    PJ_Soul Vancouver, BC Posts: 50,667
    dankind said:
    PJ_Soul said:
    dankind said:
    PJ_Soul said:
    dankind said:
    PJ_Soul said:
    dankind said:
    Ledbetterman10 said:
    I can't believe the Dems are actually considering her as a possible 2020 candidate. And that has nothing to do with Native American Ancestry (or lack thereof). If Hillary, with all her power and money, couldn't win, how could a poor man's Hillary have a chance?
    Agreed. Another fucking fossil on the ballot. (She'll be a septuagenarian in 2020.) And I actually like love Warren, but I'd never vote for her old ass.

    I love my grandma, but I won't even get in a car that she's driving.
    If that becomes a general issue then I really will be convinced that Hillary lost because she's a woman.
    Speaking for myself: I'm not sexist; I'm ageist.

    I like Hillary, too. And I would've voted for her over her dickhead husband a thousand times over in the nineties, but not in 2016. 
    I wasn't suggesting you're a sexist. It's just that Trump was over 70 when he won the election, and his age really wasn't an issue at all for either side. So if that age suddenly becomes an issue when it's a female candidate, that would tell me it is indeed a sexist thing in general.
    Since we've sadly only had dicks running the show in the White House, I can only be informed by how much more awful those dicks have been in my lifetime when they're older dicks.

    Gender (again) sadly doesn't, nay, can't inform my opinion based on past performance running the show in the White House.
    Well, there have been a couple young dicks too.
    And, for the most part, they did better jobs than the old dicks. For the most part.
    Why would it even be a question whether or not women could perform adequately btw? Why would one need to consider that there is a lack of reference based on past performances? That suggests there really is a thought process going on that is asking, "Could a woman really pull this off?"
    With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
  • eddiec
    eddiec Posts: 3,959
    dmaradona10 said:
    brianlux said:
    Definitely not a big deal but Trumpites want you to think it is.


    "Ms. Warren defended herself by saying she was not claiming to be eligible for membership in the Cherokee Nation — and she isn’t, given that her ancestors do not appear on the Dawes Rolls, early-20th-century government documents that form the basis of the Cherokee citizenship process. She said she was simply corroborating the family stories of Native American lineage that she has often recounted."


    If she did put her ancestry down as Native-American in any resumes or school applications than it's end game for her as a Presidential candidate.  They'll find it if it exists too. 
    For a democrat, yes.
    If she was a Republican, it wouldn't matter.
  • unsung
    unsung I stopped by on March 7 2024. First time in many years, had to update payment info. Hope all is well. Politicians suck. Bye. Posts: 9,487
    She isn’t NA, but she did change her heritage.  So she is a liar.  But yeah, I also think it is a ridiculous tennis match and she won’t ever be President.
  • brianlux
    brianlux Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 43,662
    edited October 2018
    dankind said:
    brianlux said:
    Reagan was 69 when he took office.  Trump is 70.  But God forbid we have a 70 year old Democratic old woman run for president.  Ohhhhhhhhhhhhh noooooooooooo!!!
    And Reagan's second term was a fucking shitshow, with poor old Nancy changing the goddamn diapers. And we know how Trump's faculties are holding up.
    People age differently.  I know or know of people well into there 70's who are sharp, smart as a tack and graced by years of wisdom. 

    Some examples:


    Wendell Berry:  A well known and respected long time bookseller recently told me, "Wendell Berry [who is 84 years old] is the greatest living writer in America today.  Berry is still producing fine works.

    John Muir: Muir was still doing great writing into his 70's


    Judi Dench: still doing great work at 83

    "It's a sad and beautiful world"
    -Roberto Benigni

  • PJ_Soul
    PJ_Soul Vancouver, BC Posts: 50,667
    unsung said:
    She isn’t NA, but she did change her heritage.  So she is a liar.  But yeah, I also think it is a ridiculous tennis match and she won’t ever be President.
    Are you ever going to tell us why being truthful is all of a sudden something you care about?
    With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
  • unsung
    unsung I stopped by on March 7 2024. First time in many years, had to update payment info. Hope all is well. Politicians suck. Bye. Posts: 9,487
    Are you going to show me where I ever said lying was ok or are you just going to project your TDS more?
  • Halifax2TheMax
    Halifax2TheMax Posts: 42,141
    unsung said:
    Are you going to show me where I ever said lying was ok or are you just going to project your TDS more?
    Oooooooo, code. I love it when you post in code. Oooooooooooo.
    09/15/1998 & 09/16/1998, Mansfield, MA; 08/29/00 08/30/00, Mansfield, MA; 07/02/03, 07/03/03, Mansfield, MA; 09/28/04, 09/29/04, Boston, MA; 09/22/05, Halifax, NS; 05/24/06, 05/25/06, Boston, MA; 07/22/06, 07/23/06, Gorge, WA; 06/27/2008, Hartford; 06/28/08, 06/30/08, Mansfield; 08/18/2009, O2, London, UK; 10/30/09, 10/31/09, Philadelphia, PA; 05/15/10, Hartford, CT; 05/17/10, Boston, MA; 05/20/10, 05/21/10, NY, NY; 06/22/10, Dublin, IRE; 06/23/10, Northern Ireland; 09/03/11, 09/04/11, Alpine Valley, WI; 09/11/11, 09/12/11, Toronto, Ont; 09/14/11, Ottawa, Ont; 09/15/11, Hamilton, Ont; 07/02/2012, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/04/2012 & 07/05/2012, Berlin, Germany; 07/07/2012, Stockholm, Sweden; 09/30/2012, Missoula, MT; 07/16/2013, London, Ont; 07/19/2013, Chicago, IL; 10/15/2013 & 10/16/2013, Worcester, MA; 10/21/2013 & 10/22/2013, Philadelphia, PA; 10/25/2013, Hartford, CT; 11/29/2013, Portland, OR; 11/30/2013, Spokane, WA; 12/04/2013, Vancouver, BC; 12/06/2013, Seattle, WA; 10/03/2014, St. Louis. MO; 10/22/2014, Denver, CO; 10/26/2015, New York, NY; 04/23/2016, New Orleans, LA; 04/28/2016 & 04/29/2016, Philadelphia, PA; 05/01/2016 & 05/02/2016, New York, NY; 05/08/2016, Ottawa, Ont.; 05/10/2016 & 05/12/2016, Toronto, Ont.; 08/05/2016 & 08/07/2016, Boston, MA; 08/20/2016 & 08/22/2016, Chicago, IL; 07/01/2018, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/03/2018, Krakow, Poland; 07/05/2018, Berlin, Germany; 09/02/2018 & 09/04/2018, Boston, MA; 09/08/2022, Toronto, Ont; 09/11/2022, New York, NY; 09/14/2022, Camden, NJ; 09/02/2023, St. Paul, MN; 05/04/2024 & 05/06/2024, Vancouver, BC; 05/10/2024, Portland, OR;

    Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.

    Brilliantati©
  • tempo_n_groove
    tempo_n_groove Posts: 41,359
    tempo_n_groove said:
    Halifax2TheMax said:

    Fact Checker •  Analysis

    Just about everything you’ve read on the Warren DNA test is wrong

    Reporters and politicians rushed to say the test shows she was only 1/1024th Native American. But that's a huge misinterpretation of the data.

    By Glenn Kessler  •  Read more »


    Not reading the article but I'm wondering if anyone heard actual Native Americans get interviewed about this on NPR?  They are all a wee bit upset at the whole thing.


    Just read the article, man I can see why we can never get anything done.  It's amazing that you can get 10 different answers from the same test and nothing is conclusive...  Makes me wonder how people actually get committed from DNA testing for crimes.
  • Ledbetterman10
    Ledbetterman10 Posts: 16,994
    edited October 2018
    unsung said:
    Are you going to show me where I ever said lying was ok or are you just going to project your TDS more?
    You know, I actually admire the way you stand your ground and fight for your opinions in these threads despite being so outnumbered. But come on, man. Obviously he's saying that you can't defend Trump who constantly lies and then get on Warren's case for this lie. 
    2000: Camden 1, 2003: Philly, State College, Camden 1, MSG 2, Hershey, 2004: Reading, 2005: Philly, 2006: Camden 1, 2, East Rutherford 1, 2007: Lollapalooza, 2008: Camden 1, Washington D.C., MSG 1, 2, 2009: Philly 1, 2, 3, 4, 2010: Bristol, MSG 2, 2011: PJ20 1, 2, 2012: Made In America, 2013: Brooklyn 2, Philly 2, 2014: Denver, 2015: Global Citizen Festival, 2016: Philly 2, Fenway 1, 2018: Fenway 1, 2, 2021: Sea. Hear. Now. 2022: Camden, 2024: Philly 2, 2025: Pittsburgh 1

    Pearl Jam bootlegs:
    http://wegotshit.blogspot.com
  • dankind
    dankind Posts: 20,841
    edited October 2018
    PJ_Soul said:
    dankind said:
    PJ_Soul said:
    dankind said:
    PJ_Soul said:
    dankind said:
    PJ_Soul said:
    dankind said:
    Ledbetterman10 said:
    I can't believe the Dems are actually considering her as a possible 2020 candidate. And that has nothing to do with Native American Ancestry (or lack thereof). If Hillary, with all her power and money, couldn't win, how could a poor man's Hillary have a chance?
    Agreed. Another fucking fossil on the ballot. (She'll be a septuagenarian in 2020.) And I actually like love Warren, but I'd never vote for her old ass.

    I love my grandma, but I won't even get in a car that she's driving.
    If that becomes a general issue then I really will be convinced that Hillary lost because she's a woman.
    Speaking for myself: I'm not sexist; I'm ageist.

    I like Hillary, too. And I would've voted for her over her dickhead husband a thousand times over in the nineties, but not in 2016. 
    I wasn't suggesting you're a sexist. It's just that Trump was over 70 when he won the election, and his age really wasn't an issue at all for either side. So if that age suddenly becomes an issue when it's a female candidate, that would tell me it is indeed a sexist thing in general.
    Since we've sadly only had dicks running the show in the White House, I can only be informed by how much more awful those dicks have been in my lifetime when they're older dicks.

    Gender (again) sadly doesn't, nay, can't inform my opinion based on past performance running the show in the White House.
    Well, there have been a couple young dicks too.
    And, for the most part, they did better jobs than the old dicks. For the most part.
    Why would it even be a question whether or not women could perform adequately btw? Why would one need to consider that there is a lack of reference based on past performances? That suggests there really is a thought process going on that is asking, "Could a woman really pull this off?"
    Not part of my process at all. In fact, if you read closely, I said that it actually (and sadly) can't be part of my process.

    I was raised by women. Nearly everyone I look up to is a woman. If anything, I think women can do most things better than men. So maybe I am sexist, too--just not the way you might be implying.

    If you're barking up my tree, you have simply picked the wrong tree. It actually couldn't be more wrong. Plenty of other squirrels to chase, though.
    Post edited by dankind on
    I SAW PEARL JAM
  • PJ_Soul
    PJ_Soul Vancouver, BC Posts: 50,667
    unsung said:
    Are you going to show me where I ever said lying was ok or are you just going to project your TDS more?
    Yeah, I don't know what that means.
    You have shown us all that lying is normally okay with you because you spread lies on a regular basis, consume media that lies on a regular basis, and refuse to speak against what is probably the biggest liar on the face of the planet.
    With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
  • unsung
    unsung I stopped by on March 7 2024. First time in many years, had to update payment info. Hope all is well. Politicians suck. Bye. Posts: 9,487
    Halifax2TheMax said:
    unsung said:
    Are you going to show me where I ever said lying was ok or are you just going to project your TDS more?
    Oooooooo, code. I love it when you post in code. Oooooooooooo.
    Trump Derangement Syndrome.

    A known side effect is assuming anyone that disagrees with your radical leftist agenda supports him without question.  Another is widespread screeching every time he sends a tweet.  But seriously keep it up, keep up the riots, keep up the accusations without evidence, keep up the lunacy, you’ll just get another four years for your prize.
  • PJ_Soul
    PJ_Soul Vancouver, BC Posts: 50,667
    edited October 2018
    unsung said:
    Halifax2TheMax said:
    unsung said:
    Are you going to show me where I ever said lying was ok or are you just going to project your TDS more?
    Oooooooo, code. I love it when you post in code. Oooooooooooo.
    Trump Derangement Syndrome.

    A known side effect is assuming anyone that disagrees with your radical leftist agenda supports him without question.  Another is widespread screeching every time he sends a tweet.  But seriously keep it up, keep up the riots, keep up the accusations without evidence, keep up the lunacy, you’ll just get another four years for your prize.
    :lol: I have never thought that you support Trump without question, nor that anyone who disagrees with my very reasonable liberal views is automatically a Trump supporter... But if you actually thought this about me, is that ever you, the pot, calling the kettle black, lol. Just that post alone shows that you're doing exactly what you're accusing me of.
    Post edited by PJ_Soul on
    With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
  • dankind
    dankind Posts: 20,841
    brianlux said:
    dankind said:
    brianlux said:
    Reagan was 69 when he took office.  Trump is 70.  But God forbid we have a 70 year old Democratic old woman run for president.  Ohhhhhhhhhhhhh noooooooooooo!!!
    And Reagan's second term was a fucking shitshow, with poor old Nancy changing the goddamn diapers. And we know how Trump's faculties are holding up.
    People age differently.  I know or know of people well into there 70's who are sharp, smart as a tack and graced by years of wisdom. 

    Some examples:


    Wendell Berry:  A well known and respected long time bookseller recently told me, "Wendell Berry [who is 84 years old] is the greatest living writer in America today.  Berry is still producing fine works.

    John Muir: Muir was still doing great writing into his 70's


    Judi Dench: still doing great work at 83

    I know this very well, Brian. But I'm not taking that chance with the leader of the free world, especially when the 25th Amendment was apparently just written for shits and giggles.

    I'm just ageist when it comes down to something like this. I own it. I think it's pragmatic more than anything.
    I SAW PEARL JAM
  • PJ_Soul
    PJ_Soul Vancouver, BC Posts: 50,667
    dankind said:
    brianlux said:
    dankind said:
    brianlux said:
    Reagan was 69 when he took office.  Trump is 70.  But God forbid we have a 70 year old Democratic old woman run for president.  Ohhhhhhhhhhhhh noooooooooooo!!!
    And Reagan's second term was a fucking shitshow, with poor old Nancy changing the goddamn diapers. And we know how Trump's faculties are holding up.
    People age differently.  I know or know of people well into there 70's who are sharp, smart as a tack and graced by years of wisdom. 

    Some examples:


    Wendell Berry:  A well known and respected long time bookseller recently told me, "Wendell Berry [who is 84 years old] is the greatest living writer in America today.  Berry is still producing fine works.

    John Muir: Muir was still doing great writing into his 70's


    Judi Dench: still doing great work at 83

    I know this very well, Brian. But I'm not taking that chance with the leader of the free world, especially when the 25th Amendment was apparently just written for shits and giggles.

    I'm just ageist when it comes down to something like this. I own it. I think it's pragmatic more than anything.
    Well... it's just ageist. I'm sure sexists think they're being pragmatic too.
    With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
  • cincybearcat
    cincybearcat Posts: 16,832
    Halifax2TheMax said:
    unsung said:
    Are you going to show me where I ever said lying was ok or are you just going to project your TDS more?
    Oooooooo, code. I love it when you post in code. Oooooooooooo.
    Here I'll translate...

    Oh Jared dear boy, where are you Jared? Jared? It's time for cookies and milk.  Now Jared dear boy, where ave I ever said lying is ok?  Go get your wife and get back to me on that.  You'll find her if you follow the $ all the way to impeachment and a PTape.  And dear Jared, I know you are upset, but please do not take your being upset at something else to project you anger on me....Jared dear boy that would be unfair.  
    hippiemom = goodness
  • tbergs
    tbergs Posts: 10,401
    eddiec said:
    dmaradona10 said:
    brianlux said:
    Definitely not a big deal but Trumpites want you to think it is.


    "Ms. Warren defended herself by saying she was not claiming to be eligible for membership in the Cherokee Nation — and she isn’t, given that her ancestors do not appear on the Dawes Rolls, early-20th-century government documents that form the basis of the Cherokee citizenship process. She said she was simply corroborating the family stories of Native American lineage that she has often recounted."


    If she did put her ancestry down as Native-American in any resumes or school applications than it's end game for her as a Presidential candidate.  They'll find it if it exists too. 
    For a democrat, yes.
    If she was a Republican, it wouldn't matter.
    Exactly. 
    It's a hopeless situation...

Categories