Every day is a new circus.
- Thread starter annabenedetti
- Start date
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
A leftist.
To them, a great-great-great-great-great grandfather who was Colombian makes you Cherokee, but people with XX chromosomes can be men.
Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk
glorydaz
Well-known member
Depends on the test. The one I took didn't register for that.
And, it depends on who spits in the tube. :chuckle:
Yeah. You probably have to go looking for it. :chuckle:
Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk
That's about it. On the plus side...well, no.
:darwinsm:
:mock: Trump haters.
| President Trump could not possibly donate his entire $400,000 annual salary for 2018 for the purpose of rebuilding military cemeteries, because he has already donated the first quarter’s worth of that salary to the Department of Veterans Affairs. |
Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk
Ask Mr. Religion
☞☞☞☞Presbyterian (PCA) 	
Gold Subscriber
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
What were the actual percentages of the Warren test showing native American Indian genetics? If it is as minute as some have been saying in the media, does that really mean one can honestly identify oneself as native American Indian?
I have read that some tribes require a minimum of 1/16 degree of blood for tribal enrollment, while the Bureau of Indian Affairs’ Higher Education Grant expects you to have the minimum of ¼ Native American blood percentages. See here. I do not know the accuracy of the data at that site.
AMR
I have read that some tribes require a minimum of 1/16 degree of blood for tribal enrollment, while the Bureau of Indian Affairs’ Higher Education Grant expects you to have the minimum of ¼ Native American blood percentages. See here. I do not know the accuracy of the data at that site.
AMR
None. They used Colombian and others' genetics to stand in for native American.
Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk
Just what is Columbian genetics?
But more to the point, trump does not care. He just likes to call people names. 5th grade is his comfort level.
The geneticist said that it indicated Native American ancestry between the 6th to 10th generation back, so that would be a fairly small percentage.
"The analysis also identified 5 genetic segments as Native American in origin at high confidence."
I don't believe she's attempted enrollment in any particular tribe or would qualify for membership with that sort of generational distance involved. More curious to me is the Cherokee Nation's peculiar response:
"Using a DNA test to lay claim to any connection to the Cherokee Nation or any tribal nation, even vaguely, is inappropriate and wrong. It makes a mockery out of DNA tests and its legitimate uses while also dishonoring legitimate tribal governments and their citizens, whose ancestors are well documented and whose heritage is prove. "
So, to be clear, Warren hasn't applied for membership in any particular tribal nation. In what legitimate sense is sustaining a claim to distant Native American relation utilizing scientifically verifiable means "inappropriate" a "mockery" and "dishonoring" anyone?
What a load from the Cherokee leadership.
I'd contrast it with the response from the Cherokee Nation over Trump's use of Pocahontas to mock Warren during a ceremony to honor Native American code talkers, including members of that particular nation. Well, I would, except they didn't have one. What was said by the larger representative of the nations collective was couched with this beginning:
“We regret that the President’s use of the name Pocahontas as a slur to insult a political adversary is overshadowing the true purpose of today’s White House ceremony.”
See the difference in tone and tenor? And between a woman who honored a distant connection she'd been taught as family lore and a man who "honored" Native Americans by using the moment to launch a political attack using a respected Native American name as a slur while they stood beneath the portrait of a president who sponsored their removal from native lands...remarkable really. But that's politics for you.
Warren's response seemed as reasonable as the tribe's mix-in felt like an overture to power:
"I won't sit quietly for @realDonaldTrump's racism, so I took a test. But DNA & family history has nothing to do with tribal affiliation or citizenship, which is determined only – only – by Tribal Nations. I respect the distinction, & don't list myself as Native in the Senate."
The Nation was silent when the president used a platform with Native Americans being honored for their role in WWII to use actually dishonorable and mocking language that traded on her understanding of that ancestry. Shame on them then and shame on them now.
Meanwhile, Trump, who initially said, "Who cares?" about the DNA evidence is now attempting to answer his own question with, "The Cherokee said what? Oh, then I care again. Pocahontas!" [/sarcasm]
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
it would be similar to me saying that my great great great great great great great great grandmother, who died in 1792 giving birth to my great great great great great great great grandfather, was from Bora-Bora, and that, even though eight generations prior and every generation after identified as American with northern european heritage, I can identify as a Bora-Boran.
seems pretty silly to me
Ask Mr. Religion
☞☞☞☞Presbyterian (PCA) 	
Gold Subscriber
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
Both sides seem petty to me about the whole thing. Trump's making hay over it all and Warren's hands are not exactly clean either, if there is any veracity in the item below:
https://www.cnn.com/2016/06/29/politics/elizabeth-warren-native-american-pocahontas/index.html
I find Warren's frequent claims of not using the connection to native American Indians a wee bit suspect. She may well have been motivated by honorable intentions when raising the matter. Perhaps cynicism borne out of the past and present political environment these past few years underlies my opinion. When someone goes out of their way to specifically point out their heritage, I tend to assume an unstated motive is at work. Whether the motive is honorable or not, is sometimes difficult to determine if it is not made plain.
The remaining issue I wrestle with in this topic is the reasonableness of laying claim and then making a big deal of it, when 6-10 generations are required to establish the claim. Most of us are mongrels at some level, so going back 240-400 years to find a connection to some race and then checking a box labeled Norwegian on some law directory listing my name would be odd given the fact that my grandparents on one side were Irish citizens and second-generation German citizens on the other side. I mean, why exactly would I do this if not for some other reasons less than prudent?
At the end of the day, the recent ruling against Stormy Daniels seems to settle the issue that political hyperbole is protected. Of course, that does not mean these tactics on all sides are not worthy of scrutiny and denunciation where warranted. It saddens me that this behavior is the new normal.
AMR
We're going to differ on this one. If someone repeatedly brings up a point that's untrue and you respond to it repeatedly, it's not an equal footing.
I don't. They were backed by the university.
To me it's more like this, an element of the hard right found out about her claims relating to her ancestry and used it to mock her repeatedly, to make it an issue that Trump took and ran with at some point. Eventually she did something objective about it. I can't blame her. Taking it out of the realm of lore and ending the speculation seems reasonable to me, as does rubbing it in his face a bit (and by extension the originators).
What's utterly symptomatic of the mindset of those people is the new line, essentially, "Most white people are more Indian than Warren." Or the more subtle, "If you're like most white people you have a sliver of Native American DNA." And, "Warren having Native American DNA doesn't make her Native American." I've read variations on those in a number of outlets already, From the Boston Globe, the Washington Examiner (claiming Warren is really, really white--whatever that means to them) to FB memes (the "Indian" bit), attempts to manage the embarrassment or create claims and positions that aren't part of the actual point.
As for genetic commonality and the impact of Native Americans within descendents of white Europeans, the mix in is negligible, probably owing to generations of racism that kept the bloodlines more clearly separated until fairly recently, on the whole and a sheer numbers game in terms of ratios. Here's an article on the point you might find edifying from sciencemag.org (link).
I suspect it's largely due to the hay the other side was attempting to make.
Mine was recently updated. I'm about as white as a human being can be and still jump, apparently.
The new breakdown eliminated some early marginal findings and I'm 60% England, Wales, and Northwestern Europe, and 40% Ireland and Scotland. No Native American at all, as it turns out. I know the Northwestern part is Swedish (family lore). And there you go.
True enough. :sigh:
Ask Mr. Religion
☞☞☞☞Presbyterian (PCA) 	
Gold Subscriber
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
This might be the nugget around the whole matter.
I have been speaking to these "her claims" that were found out. That they were discovered by groups with nefarious agendas is not really at issue for me. Rather I am trying to understand the motive(s) underlying the self-identification claim in the first place, especially when she goes to the length of checking a racial group box in a legal directory. I do not know the factuality of that event, but if it is true, and I assumed it to be so, I am wondering, aloud here, what is reason behind this action? I do think it bears some scrutiny as it seems to be at the root of the brouhaha that has resulted.
The action may very well have been with the best or sentimental intentions, "This one's for you, Grandma." I do not know.
AMR
People like the idea of being part of a minority.
Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk
I think she took the family stories as presented and suspect they became a sentimental attachment for Warren. We've romanticized that connection in relatively recent times, a sharp contrast from prior treatment societally speaking. The same has been true of Irish connections and, prior to a couple of WWs it was true of German roots and connections, with that making a comeback of late.
And when you think about it, it's as old as the Bible. Roots, associations, lineage have always mattered to us, as if that association imparted something more than knowledge to us.
The test? I think that was a shut up move made in exasperation and with a measure of calculation, as I doubt we'd have heard about it had the matter gone the other way, though I might be mistaken. Maybe she'd have released it and said, "Ah, well, so much for a cherished family recollection."
Yep. I think that's fair. All the stuff about her ticking the "I'm a minority" boxes were probably just her being sentimental, rather than anything nefarious.
Doesn't mean it wasn't dumb, though, and worthy of mockery.
:mock: Fake Indians.
Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk