Elizabeth Warren Appropriates Native American Heritage for Personal Gain

She’s lied about this for 40 years for her personal gain.

(CNN)Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren listed her race as “American Indian” on a State Bar of Texas registration card in 1986, the Washington Post reported Tuesday.

The Post’s reporting represents a previously unknown instance of Warren claiming her race as Native American and the first document that appears to definitively show Warren making the claim in her own handwriting. According to the Post, Warren has previously declined to answer whether she or an assistant filled out forms in which her race was listed as Native American.
Warren’s longstanding assertions of having Native American heritage have dogged her political career and provided fodder for attacks from President Donald Trump. Her use of DNA testing to confirm her limited Native roots last year was met with fierce criticism from some Native American groups. The prospective 2020 Democratic presidential candidate is expected to formally announce her entrance into the race on Saturday after forming an exploratory committee on New Year’s Eve.
The card, obtained by the Post in an open records request, lists Warren’s alma maters of the University of Houston and Rutgers Law School but no other racial identifiers.
Stories like this reveal the dirty underside of our identity politics.

63 Responses to Elizabeth Warren Appropriates Native American Heritage for Personal Gain

  1. Jason says:

    My mother used to tell me that I have Indian blood in the family a few generations back.  But she always told me to mark Caucasian on any forms I filled out for jobs, taxes, etc when I was young.

    I can’t imagine this not to have been the case with the esteemed Mrs Warren did this as a mistake.  I wonder if either of her biological parents identified as Caucasian.  It’s pretty hard to switch out of that path, I think – but I’m no certified genealogist.

  2. Jason says:

    Oh, and usually such forms asking for identification have wording similar to this one…

    >A person having origins in any of the original peoples of North and South America (including Central America), and who maintains tribal affiliation or community attachment.

     

    Notice the “AND”.  She’s denied that publicly.  So it’s not a simple “mistake” at this point.

  3. Pat says:

    This is a nothing hamberder. The Trumps, of German heritage, lied about being Swedish so not to offend Jews in furtherance of their own personal gain. Big deal, right?

  4. Kevin Scheunemann says:

    Pat,

    She lies to gain standing in the racist liberal, intersectional heirarchy.

    The more victimized you are, the more your idea mean in the sick, evil, and twisted liberal lexicon.

    The less you are victimized, then you suffer from “patriarchy” or “white privilege”, or “toxic masculinity”.

    Warren, with her failure to prove her victim status as a Native American is only one step better than me, because of her gender.

    That leaves her on the outside of the intersectional, racist, liberal sweepstakes for the Democratic nomination.

    Poor Beto is completely handicapped in the racist intersectional sweepstakes for the Democrat nomination.

  5. Pat says:

    Kevin says, “The more victimized you are, the more your idea mean in the sick, evil, and twisted liberal lexicon.”

    How so?

  6. Kevin Scheunemann says:

    Pat,

    Get with the program.

    Have you not heard of the evil liberal concepts of “white privilege”, “male patriarchy” and “toxic masculinity”.    Those are all concepts to tell those in that category to “shut-up.”

    Kamala Harris on other hand, checks 2 victim boxes.   She is a woman, and she is black.   If she came out and said she dabbles in lesbianism or flirting with trans feelings, she could check a 3rd victim box.   In liberal lexicon her speech is more serious and better than the Gospel.

    Liberalism is all about victim status.

    If you are Beto, who has no victim status, how can you even debate Kamala, without being a toxic male, white guy exercising his privilege on her?

    Liberalsim is not about ideas it is about the value of your race, victimization, or non-victimization.

    Liberals are rampant racists and we need to put a stop to it.

  7. Pat says:

    Kevin,

    You still offered nothing but blah, blah, blah, blah, uber rightest propaganda talking points, but offered up no evidence beyond, “this is what I think”.

  8. Jason says:

    Pat, that’s a nothing burger.

  9. Pat says:

    Jason, your correct. Kevin offered a nothing burger of a response to validate what he said. Thanks for concurring.

  10. Kevin Scheunemann says:

    Pat,

    Stay blind to the liberal racism, it only perpetuates the problem.

  11. Pat says:

    Kevin,

    I look to your vast knowledge to help educate us blind folk to see clearly. Please offer up evidence to support your rhetoric.

  12. Jason says:

    Pat, another nothing burger.  Keep up the good work chef.

  13. Kevin Scheunemann says:

    Pat,

    Here is a primer for those ignorant on these matters:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rc7VUoytoU4

  14. Pat says:

    Kevin,

    I didn’t see any evidence for what you’re talking about. I watched your video, but only saw some nut job spinning a his own theory without any scientific evidence. Has there been a reputable study conducted to prove your contention?

  15. Pat says:

    Jason,

    Sorry, I thought you were actually attempting to say something. Of course you didn’t. Keep trolling.

  16. Kevin Scheunemann says:

    Pat,

    You need an academic to tell you the obvious?

    Do you ever think for yourself?

    Would you like to focus on the BS studies on “toxic masculinity” or  “white privilege”?

  17. Jason says:

    Sorry Pat, I learned from you.   More nothing burger.

  18. Pat says:

    Kevin,

    Here is an interesting read about if there is Intersectional Conservativism;

    “Intersectionality is a made-up word to describe membership in different sub-tribes for the purpose of grievance-mongering.

    Conservatives have something similar, but conservatives being conservative are averse to nonsense words and instead prefer traditional terms to describe the same idea of the Venn diagram overlap of common interests, in this sense words such as “coalition” or alliance.”

    For example, a religious right individual might view a particular self-destructive behavior as sinful, and blanket government subsidies to said individual suffering from the consequences of that behavior (that does nothing to discourage such behavior) as subsidizing self-damaging sin, and therefore partaking of the sin. A libertarian might not have a moral position on the same behavior, but views the government subsidizing of anyone’s personal life choices as an immoral theft of taxpayers’ hard earned income. So their intersection, or Venn diagram overlap of interest, is to reduce government funding of particular social services. If you think those who suffer from the effects of certain behavior choices need help, you can pay personally to support them out of your own pocket, but you cannot compel others to financially support your favorite causes.

    Another more famous example of odd intersectionality of conservatism is the 2008 vote and California’s Prop 8 anti-gay marriage amendment. Now, it is well known that for the past 2 decades, there haven’t been enough conservatives in California to pass a resolution to declare water wet. But a small cadre of conservatives were able to put a proposition on the general election ballot to end gay marriage in California. California is very tolerant, and even among conservatives it didn’t have strong support. The proposition even lost the white vote by a large margin. However this was 2008 and voter turnout was going to be huge, particularly among non-white populations. As such, democrat-leaning socially conservative Hispanic Catholics and socially conservative black Protestants turned out to vote for Obama and also vote for Prop-8 to ban gay marriage. So Prop-8 passed due to an intersection or coalition of conservative white republicans and conservative black and Hispanic democrats. Prop-8 was later struck down in federal court as unconstitutional, but that’s another story.“

  19. Pat says:

    Jason,

    That’s the same way a child would say, nah, nah, nah, nah, nah. Did you put your fingers in you ears and stick out your tongue too?

  20. Kevin Scheunemann says:

    Pat,

    Problem is: Conservatives debate ideas.

    Liberals debate identity.   (thus victimology)

    The latter is dangerous to the Democracy.

     

  21. Jason says:

    Just like you pat.   Strong leader, handing out nothing burgers.

  22. Pat says:

    Kevin,

    But isn’t conservativism made up of many identities, with their own degrees of victimization, to coalesce around a specific political ideology?

  23. Kevin Scheunemann says:

    Pat,

    No, it’s made up of ideas.

    Identities only play a role when evil liberal lexicon is assigning identities to conservatives.

  24. Merlin says:

    Too bad stolen heritage doesn’t carry penalties similar to stolen valor.

  25. Pat says:

    Kevin,

    So conservatives don’t consider themselves to be victimized individuals?

  26. Kevin Scheunemann says:

    Pat,

    Only when liberals disdain us by saying crap like “all Christians”, or use terms like “white privilege”, “patriarchy”, or “ toxic masculinity”. When liberals are destroying debate with a “shut the hell up” race label, yes, then we are victims.

    I like to debate ideas, not race status, or my gender status.

    I engage it to battle the intersectional, racist, liberal evil, which must be stopped.

  27. Pat says:

    Kevin,

    Okay, then conservativism is made up of many identities, with their own degrees of victimization, to coalesce around a specific political ideology.

  28. Kevin Scheunemann says:

    Pat,

    Only from sick liberal point of view.

    Nearly every conservative sees themselves as an individual believing in greatness of God, USA, capitalism.

    We are not defined by evil.

  29. Pat says:

    Kevin said, “We are not defined by evil.”

    Kevin, are you saying you define everyone else who is not part of your “We” as evil?

  30. jjf says:

    Kevin, there’s debate, where people exchange ideas and hopefully present some evidence, and then there’s state-subsidized proselytization, where you’re using public funds to promote your faith.

  31. Kevin Scheunemann says:

    Pat,

    I’m saying anyone partaking in sick, twisted, intersectional lexicon participated in racist, evil, ideas.

  32. Kevin Scheunemann says:

    Jjf,

    You mean like evolution and global warming cult?

  33. Pat says:

    Kevin said, “I’m saying anyone partaking in sick, twisted, intersectional lexicon participated in racist, evil, ideas.”

    The right has their fair share of intersectional lexicon extremism which supports racism, and evil ideas. Should we take out our broad brush and paint all conservatives the same?

  34. Kevin Scheunemann says:

    PAt,

    Point examples out of conservatives who are racists and I, and nearly every other conservative will denounce them.

    Will liberals ever denounce the rampant Anti-Semitism on the left? the sorting by race? gender? carnal choices?

    No?   Liberals will never denounce their own, as evidence of the survival of these Democrat rapists and racist in Virginia at the top.

    So, yes, a broad brush can be painted until liberals start to clean up their immoral filth.

  35. Pat says:

    Kevin,

    Steve King

  36. Jason says:

    Pat, what a nothing burger.

    >the Republican Steering Committee removed King from all House committee assignments.

    Seems like that meets Kevin’s qualifier of denouncing racists – or in this case – someone who as far as I know has never been photographed in blackface, but made some comments other’s didn’t like.

     

  37. Pat says:

    Jason,

    Thanks for attempting to help Kevin out.
    King has proven time and time again over his 26 years in the House of Representatives of his racism. I never heard a peep from any conservative until recently, and yet, he remains in office as a steadfast conservative, and a darling of Trump.

  38. Pat says:

    Another intersectional conservative group.

    Army of God

  39. Pat says:

    I can keep trickling intersectional conservative evil.

  40. Kevin Scheunemann says:

    Pat

    He should resign.

    However, what he did is nothing compared to these racist infanticide, baby killing Democrats.

    Hardly a comparison in terms of evil.

  41. Pat says:

    Kevin,

    Is some evil acceptable to conservatives?

  42. Kevin Scheunemann says:

    Pat,

    In terms of demanding someone resign?

    We didn’t make rules, liberals did with their pathetic attacks on Kavanaugh.

    Now libs must live by standard they set.

  43. Pat says:

    Kevin,

    But, is some evil acceptable to conservatives?

  44. Kevin Scheunemann says:

    Pat,

    Depends what you are talking about.

    In case of Covington kids, I would have had no problem with him telling the lying liberal drummer to “find Jesus”.

    Liberals would have perceived that as evil.

    So when you say “evil”, depends upon whether you view evil in the light of the truth of Eternity in Christ?

  45. Pat says:

    Kevin,

    You said, “We are not defined by evil.”

    And said, “I’m saying anyone partaking in sick, twisted, intersectional lexicon participated in racist, evil, ideas.”

    I gave an example of racist, evil, ideas, in the intersection conservative lexicon by referencing Steve King. The Alt-Right is also part of the intersectional conservative lexicon, which promotes evil.

  46. Kevin Scheunemann says:

    PAt,

    And I said, and many other conservatives have said, he should resign.

     

  47. Pat says:

    Kevin,

    So evil does exist in the conservative intersectional lexicon.

  48. Kevin Scheunemann says:

    PAt,

    There is no “conservative intersectional lexicon” because conservative ideas do not judge by race, gender or carnal choices.

    It is about the idea being good or bad, not whether someone is a victim.

  49. Pat says:

    Kevin,

    It does exist. I gave examples of it’s existence.

  50. Kevin Scheunemann says:

    Pat,

    No you didn’t because if conservatives jusdged by race and victimology, we would be rushing to defend Steve king.

    That is not the case.

    Conservatives have thrown him to the wolves.

    Let’s get down to all the liberals who get a pass for racisim and rape, especially in virginia.

  51. Pat says:

    Kevin,

    I believe that prominent liberals have called for the Virginia Governor to resign.

    And I see many individuals in the intersectional conservative lexicon displaying victimization on a constant basis.

  52. Kevin Scheunemann says:

    Pat,

    They are backing off and protests are not ensuing.

    Had this been a Republican, like Walker…liberals would have occupied Madison and stuck up the joint until Walker resigned.

    Leftist liberals are doing no such thing in Virginia, so the calls we have heard are hollow and politically calculated, not from some base moral standard.

    Liberalism is evil and hypocritical.

  53. Pat says:

    Kevin,

    Now you’re talking like a victim.

  54. Kevin Scheunemann says:

    Pat,

    Just explaining the hypocritical reality.

    This is why the Kavanaugh assault by the left was so precious.   He was roasted for literally nothing, now when actual racists and rapists come to light in liberal lkexicon…”nothing to see here, move along now”.

    Liberals have set the standard, they must abide by it.

    this is going to torch the Democrat Party and Hollywood liberals, we have only begun to scratch the surface on the immorality of leftist, especially in the racism and rapist category.

    This is going to be fun seeing this.   Especially if you are defending, or running interference for racists and rapists.

  55. Pat says:

    Kevin,

    And I thought the standard was set by the conservative intersectional lexicons acceptance of Trump with his lies and sexual misdeeds.

  56. Kevin Scheunemann says:

    Oh Pat,

    No, that standard was set by Bill Clinton for the office of President.

     

  57. Pat says:

    Kevin,

    So the conservative intersectional lexicon accepts Trumps evil behavior.

  58. Kevin Scheunemann says:

    Pat,

    If there was an “intersectional conservative lexicon” you would see groups like “real men who only sleep with women for Trump” or “Men who know they are men and will not pretend to be women for Trump”.

    We don’t see any of that kind of open “grouping”.

     

  59. Pat says:

    Kevin,

    Why? Because you say so??

    I see lots of grouping in the conservative intersectional lexicon.

  60. Kevin Scheunemann says:

    Pat,

    Example?

  61. Pat says:

    Kevin,

    I already gave examples.

  62. Kevin Scheunemann says:

    Pat,

    And I destroyed it as nonsense.

     

  63. Pat says:

    Kevin,

    I didn’t see anything destroyed.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.