Trump owes Warren $1 million. Will he pay his debt?

[_Kevin Graham]

I wonder what Warren was thinking when she decided to claim to be part native american?

It wasn't something she "decided" it was something she believed to be true since childhood. And it is true.

Maybe religious thinking and a desire to believe in family myth overcame her?

It wasn't myth. The test results confirm she has Native American ancestry. Try to keep up.

Too bad it could potentially sink her presidential run so early in the process.

Yes, because a country that elects a corrupt, derelict of a human being, just weeks after they hear him on audio admitting to sexual assault, couldn't possibly consider this a minor, non-issue.

We all know that Trump won't let it go

Which says plenty about his stupidity.

She needs to get another test done probably, and from a group that uses north american tribes as controls (cherokee perhaps?) instead of tribes from Mexico, Peru, and Columbia.

Why would she need to get another test done, because you didn't like these results? So maybe the next test shows she's part Mayan instead of Cherokee, does that really make any difference? Does it make her a liar when we already know for a fact this was her, and her family's genuine belief since as early as 1984? No.

However, one would assume that several tests were done, confidentially, and this was the best one?

I never realized you were one of those conspiracy minded idiots.

Even so, a lot of americans can claim some native american ancestry, as Warren has, but don't because they don't think 1.6% to as little as .1% is anything remarkable.

Most people don't think 6% is remarkable either, but that's enough to declare federal benefits and minority status. Do you think someone with just 6% Indian blood can't be blonde hair and blue eyed? Warren has 16 times the Indian DNA as any average white American. I've been claiming Native American heritage ever since I can remember being told my great grandmother was an Indian. And according to Ancestry.com I'm only 2% Native American.

[_EAllusion]

Yeah, it's clear that you don't understand that race being a socially determined category rather than a fact of nature doesn't preclude the existence of racism because mental categories are things that people can have beliefs about. Like if taxonomic boundaries are socially constructed, which is a popular view, that doesn't mean it becomes gibberish to say, "Susan is afraid of spiders." That statement then just means Susan is afraid of the artifical, fuzzy boundaried, mental category of things we call "spiders."

This is quite embarrassing, either as a troll attempt or as a sincere thought.

One might be tempted to list a series of morphological traits that elementary students learn make something a spider: 8 jointed legs, two body segments, exoskeleton, etc. It would be no surprise that the morphology of spiders is more complex than this and does not submit to such easy classification, but more importantly, the fact that we list those collection of traits as "spiders" and not more or less is arbitrary. It's mental category to help us make sense of nature rather than "spiders" being a real category of things that exist in nature. There's no essential nature of a spider that you can point to that definitely makes one thing a spider and another thing not.

"Aha!" you say. "Spiders are actually defined by being a population of organisms that are closely related to one another. That is written onto their very DNA, which is a thing that exists in nature."

You are related to spiders. Are you a spider? Unless the line between what makes an organism a spider and not a spider is something we can identify as a meaningful distinction in nature, the cutoff for degree of relatedness is just arbitrary. It's socially constructed. While there is a heated debate in philosophy of biology about whether species are real, this kind of antirealism is quite common at the higher taxonomic categories.

So let's say you agree that "spiders" are a socially constructed category. Does that mean you must therefore think arachnophobia doesn't exist and if you talk about people who are afraid of spiders, you are contradicting yourself? Is treatment for arachophobia nonsensical in a world where spiders are a social construct?

Of course, not. That would be so, so dumb. Saying the concept of "spiders" is socially constructed doesn't mean that people don't have ideas about what a spider is that they react to. We can still interact with those ideas. In this case, "spiders" are actually a useful construct.

Or, lets take another useful social construct: marriage. Marriages exist in the mental worlds of the participants and their surrounding culture. They aren't a fact of nature; they are an artificial category of relationship. That doesn't mean its irrational to talk about marriages as though they have cultural significance. That doesn't mean it is irrational to have opinions on how the law should treat marriages. Mental worlds still exist and the content of them still has an impact on how people live their lives.

If you want to argue that since "spouse" is a social construct, that means no one has a basis to complain about affairs, be my guest.

[_Quasimodo]

Most people don't think 6% is remarkable either, but that's enough to declare federal benefits and minority status. Do you think someone with just 6% Indian blood can't be blonde hair and blue eyed? Warren has 16 times the Indian DNA as any average white American. I've been claiming Native American heritage ever since I can remember being told my great grandmother was an Indian. And according to Ancestry.com I'm only 2% Native American.

A lot of the people I met when I lived in Tennessee claimed some Cherokee ancestry. That's not hard to believe. My best friend comes from the Knoxville area and it shows in his face. As far as I know, he hasn't done a DNA test, but I'm pretty sure it would show that.

The Cherokees interacted more than most tribes with Europeans.

[_EAllusion]

I wonder what Warren was thinking when she decided to claim to be part native american? Maybe religious thinking and a desire to believe in family myth overcame her? UPenn and Harvard claim it didn't help her with those institutions, although satisfying some quota had to be the thinking on her part. Too bad it could potentially sink her presidential run so early in the process. We all know that Trump won't let it go if Warren is a contender and defending 1/64 to 1/1024 might be too high of a mountain against Clinton's resurrected corpse in 2020. She needs to get another test done probably, and from a group that uses north american tribes as controls (cherokee perhaps?) instead of tribes from Mexico, Peru, and Columbia. However, one would assume that several tests were done, confidentially, and this was the best one? Even so, a lot of americans can claim some native american ancestry, as Warren has, but don't because they don't think 1.6% to as little as .1% is anything remarkable. Hell, I thought of getting a little of the casino money back in the day (I have a Native American ancestor from around the time of Warren's) until they starting making one prove that one had at least 1/16th.

Donald Trump averages more than 1 scandal a week that is more serious than, in the worst case scenario mind you, Warren having exaggerated the extent of her Native American heritage. But maybe that's an unfair point. Perhaps Donald Trump exists above normal political standards. We should just take this on its own terms.

But on it's own terms, it's such a small thing it's difficult to imagine why anyone should take it as a serious, disqualifying trait unless you are in the tiny group of people who find Native American identity a major voting issue. The conservatives who are pretending to act like it is while they support a pathological liar can be dismissed right away, but what of anyone else? By default, I have a real hard time imagining this issue penetrating at all. Of course, the right-wing media won't let it go because that's a favorite point of attack against her. The real question is whether mainstream journalism will cover it as a major scandal. They might, because they are so, very, very broken, and if they do, then it could genuinely hurt Warren. It's actually not difficult for me to imagine some "bombshell" report that finds an obscure example of Warren exaggerating even more than we've been led to believe and that being covered as a five-alarm fire. This fact would coexist in a universe where the President of the United States having story that strongly implies his real-estate empire was built on crime and lies was a half-day affair.

We won't know until the campaign is more in full gear. As of right now, it seems like nothing. And to the extent that it prompts Trump to engage in "Pocahontas" attacks, it might even be a benefit. Could it become a mini "but her emails!" ? Maybe. Time will tell.

[_Kevin Graham]

A lot of the people I met when I lived in Tennessee claimed some Cherokee ancestry. That's not hard to believe. My best friend comes from the Knoxville area and it shows in his face. As far as I know, he hasn't done a DNA test, but I'm pretty sure it would show that.

The Cherokees interacted more than most tribes with Europeans.

In Alabama there were four major tribes, the Cherokee, Choctaw, Creek and I think Chickasaw. I never considered my indian heritage anything worth talking about unless the subject arose. I do remember after graduating high school my best friend's fiance told me to claim minority status on college apps so I could go for free, and I also remember laughing at her saying, "yeah right like anyone would ever believe I was part Indian." My brother and sister maybe, but not me. And I'd have literally no way of proving it anyway. 1989 was before DNA science was able to determine such things.

[_Water Dog]

REKED

"A DNA test is useless to determine tribal citizenship. Current DNA tests do not even distinguish whether a person's ancestors were indigenous to North or South America. Sovereign tribal nations set their own legal requirements for citizenship, and while DNA tests can be used to determine lineage, such as paternity to an individual, it is not evidence for tribal affiliation. 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. Senator Warren is undermining tribal interests with her continued claims of tribal heritage."

- Cherokee Nation Secretary of State Chuck Hoskin, Jr.

https://www.kjrh.com/news/local-news/ch ... st-results

[_canpakes]

REKED

"A DNA test is useless to determine tribal citizenship. Current DNA tests do not even distinguish whether a person's ancestors were indigenous to North or South America. Sovereign tribal nations set their own legal requirements for citizenship, and while DNA tests can be used to determine lineage, such as paternity to an individual, it is not evidence for tribal affiliation. 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. Senator Warren is undermining tribal interests with her continued claims of tribal heritage."

- Cherokee Nation Secretary of State Chuck Hoskin, Jr.

https://www.kjrh.com/news/local-news/ch ... st-results

Is Warren claiming to be Cherokee, specifically?

[_Water Dog]

[_canpakes]

Dog, is Warren claiming to be Cherokee, specifically?

[_Quasimodo]

REKED

"A DNA test is useless to determine tribal citizenship. Current DNA tests do not even distinguish whether a person's ancestors were indigenous to North or South America. Sovereign tribal nations set their own legal requirements for citizenship, and while DNA tests can be used to determine lineage, such as paternity to an individual, it is not evidence for tribal affiliation. 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. Senator Warren is undermining tribal interests with her continued claims of tribal heritage."

- Cherokee Nation Secretary of State Chuck Hoskin, Jr.

https://www.kjrh.com/news/local-news/ch ... st-results

Since tribal affiliation is not possible to prove with DNA, does it even matter? Native American DNA is quite provable. Warren does show positive for NA ancestry. That should be enough. She does have that ancestry. That's quite enough enough.