Politics Elizabeth Warren doubles down

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
MarAzul said:
Help me out here! I can't possible read that much about Warren.
Is she Pocahontas or not?
Click to expand...

Unless Elizabeth Warren is over 400 years old, then I would venture a guess that she isn't. :beatinto:
 
BrianFromWA said:
Well, when there are tangible benefits, some people do unethical things to exploit them. Some cheat on their taxes. Some lie to get college scholarships. Some to get Affirmative Action quotas. Some to get upgrades to first class.

America has decided to give a shit about ethnic ancestry to dole out benefits unequally. Whether or not you think it's good or fair or needed, it's happening. And if the Senator is one to lie to exploit those benefits for personal gain, that breach of integrity used to be enough to disqualify someone from high office. Now, the bars have been set lower, we're much more about party stratification and people can vote for someone who's a "lesser of evils" b/c we only think there are two choices.
Click to expand...
I'm sorry but where did Senator Warren exploit her heritage to gain some benefit?
 
MarAzul said:
I don't think it matter whether she gained or not. She made the claim to gain what it might.
Click to expand...

Did she? and why does it matter so much to you? We have a president that lies on average about 16 times a day over the last few months. Does that bother you?
 
Can someone explain to me how 1. calling someone Pocahontas, regardless of their DNA, isn't racist? and 2. why it's okay in the forum? Stop already.
 
Propagandist said:
It's funny, I don't find that shit funny at all. It's fucked, in fact. Very very fucked.
Click to expand...
Who the fuck went back into February to resurrect this shit? Anyways, I found it funny and stupid. Sorry you didn’t.
 
Propagandist said:
Can someone explain to me how 1. calling someone Pocahontas, regardless of their DNA, isn't racist? and 2. why it's okay in the forum? Stop already.
Click to expand...
Can you explain to me how it’s racist?
 
Cippy91 said:
Can you explain to me how it’s racist?
Click to expand...
1. It is incredibly derogatory;
2. It compares anyone claiming to be of Native American blood but not proven to Trump's satisfaction and in the opposing political party to be a Native American heroine in a very demeaning intended way. This has the added feature of demeaning Pocahontas.

How any intelligent Trump supporter (is there such a thing?) can go along with this trash is beyond me. Simply disgusting, the modus operendi of Trump.

I will ALWAYS oppose racial attacks.
 
Lanny said:
1. It is incredibly derogatory;
2. It compares anyone claiming to be of Native American blood but not proven to Trump's satisfaction and in the opposing political party to be a Native American heroine in a very demeaning intended way. This has the added feature of demeaning Pocahontas.

How any intelligent Trump supporter (is there such a thing?) can go along with this trash is beyond me. Simply disgusting, the modus operendi of Trump.

I will ALWAYS oppose racial attacks.
Click to expand...
Politics aside. It’s not racist. Pocahontas was a real person, but most know of the character through the Disney movie. A beautiful Native American woman. I don’t see in any way how that’s racist. I mean sure as far as how trump used it, it was derogatory but was it racist? Certainly not. In that case better stop comparing any race to any popular figure among that race or other race. I mean come on, that’s a bit of a reach
 
Cippy91 said:
Can you explain to me how it’s racist?
Click to expand...

Absolutely.

First of all Pocahontas was a Powhatan. Senator Warren claims to be part Cherokee. Simply by calling her Pocahontas clumps all 500 federally recognized tribes in the US together. Would it be okay to use the moniker Bruce Lee to describe all Asians? Or Desmond Tutu to describe all Africans? Etc etc etc. Obviously not, right? It's the same fucking thing.

Secondly. This isn't being used as a term of endearment; it's intended to be pejorative and divisive, and is therefore a slur.

Thirdly, let me quote the general secretary of the Alliance of Colonial Tribes: "The reference is using a historic American Indian figure as a derogatory insult and that's insulting to all American Indians."

This is a classic take-a-step-back situation. Take a step back and imagine how it'd feel to be a Native American and have the President of the United States and thousands of others saying this shit and thinking it's funny.
 
Cippy91 said:
Politics aside. It’s not racist. Pocahontas was a real person, but most know of the character through the Disney movie. A beautiful Native American woman. I don’t see in any way how that’s racist. I mean sure as far as how trump used it, it was derogatory but was it racist? Certainly not. In that case better stop comparing any race to any popular figure among that race or other race. I mean come on, that’s a bit of a reach
Click to expand...
Strenuously disagree.
 
Propagandist said:
Absolutely.

First of all Pocahontas was a Powhatan. Senator Warren claims to be part Cherokee. Simply by calling her Pocahontas clumps all 500 federally recognized tribes in the US together. Would it be okay to use the moniker Bruce Lee to describe all Asians? Or Desmond Tutu to describe all Africans? Etc etc etc. Obviously not, right? It's the same fucking thing.

Secondly. This isn't being used as a term of endearment; it's intended to be pejorative and divisive, and is therefore a slur.

Thirdly, let me quote the general secretary of the Alliance of Colonial Tribes: "The reference is using a historic American Indian figure as a derogatory insult and that's insulting to all American Indians."

This is a classic take-a-step-back situation. Take a step back and imagine how it'd feel to be a Native American and have the President of the United States and thousands of others saying this shit and thinking it's funny.
Click to expand...
Okay so for example if there is any woman of a darker color and hair whether it be a more tanned white woman or Mexican, Asian, Native American and somebody makes a comment to that woman saying she looks like Pocahontas, is that racist? Meaning that woman is beautiful. What if I’m comparing an mma fighter and his style or speed to Bruce lee whether he’s black, asian, or white? I guess that’s all racist too? I mean come on
 
Propagandist said:
Absolutely.

First of all Pocahontas was a Powhatan. Senator Warren claims to be part Cherokee. Simply by calling her Pocahontas clumps all 500 federally recognized tribes in the US together. Would it be okay to use the moniker Bruce Lee to describe all Asians? Or Desmond Tutu to describe all Africans? Etc etc etc. Obviously not, right? It's the same fucking thing.

Secondly. This isn't being used as a term of endearment; it's intended to be pejorative and divisive, and is therefore a slur.

Thirdly, let me quote the general secretary of the Alliance of Colonial Tribes: "The reference is using a historic American Indian figure as a derogatory insult and that's insulting to all American Indians."

This is a classic take-a-step-back situation. Take a step back and imagine how it'd feel to be a Native American and have the President of the United States and thousands of others saying this shit and thinking it's funny.
Click to expand...
You know what else I heard from certain people was insulting to native Americans? The Washington redskins name. Turns out, they didn’t give a shit.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/loca...ory.html?utm_term=.9b4909726810&noredirect=on
 
Cippy91 said:
Okay so for example if there is any woman of a darker color and hair whether it be a more tanned white woman or Mexican, Asian, Native American and somebody makes a comment to that woman saying she looks like Pocahontas, is that racist? Meaning that woman is beautiful. What if I’m comparing an mma fighter and his style or speed to Bruce lee whether he’s black, asian, or white? I guess that’s all racist too? I mean come on
Click to expand...

You can't be serious. You're trying to elicit a response, right?

How the fuck would you know what Pocahontas looked like? That is completely dumb. The first photograph of anything was in the 1800s. Or are you talking about the Disney movie Pocahontas? "Damn, that girl looks like a character from a kid's movie."? Weird.

And obviously comparing fighting attributes isn't racist. Why? Because it doesn't concern race.

Cippy91 said:
You know what else I heard from certain people was insulting to native Americans? The Washington redskins name. Turns out, they didn’t give a shit.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/loca...ory.html?utm_term=.9b4909726810&noredirect=on
Click to expand...

So if only 10% of roughly 500 people meant to represent a decimated population of what was once roughly 500 nations thinks that something is racist, then it isn't? Is a majority needed? That is idiotic. That too is a slur. Walk up to a Native American and call him a redskin and see how that goes.

Dude, this brief exchange is depressing me. Please, tell me you're kidding around or are 13 years old or something.
 
Propagandist said:
You can't be serious. You're trying to elicit a response, right?

How the fuck would you know what Pocahontas looked like? That is completely dumb. The first photograph of anything was in the 1800s. Or are you talking about the Disney movie Pocahontas? "Damn, that girl looks like a character from a kid's movie."? Weird.

And obviously comparing fighting attributes isn't racist. Why? Because it doesn't concern race.



So if only 10% of roughly 500 people meant to represent a decimated population of what was once roughly 500 nations thinks that something is racist, then it isn't? Is a majority needed? That is idiotic. That too is a slur. Walk up to a Native American and call him a redskin and see how that goes.

Dude, this brief exchange is depressing me. Please, tell me you're kidding around or are 13 years old or something.
Click to expand...
I’m speaking in general, yes the majority of people know Pocahontas as a Disney character. That’s what I’m talking about. Not the real pocohontas considering we don’t actually know what she looked like. I was just saying as an example, as the pocohontas a majority of America knows. What’s the difference? You’re still comparing somebody to something. Yes trump used this in a derogatory term but to say it’s racist is just ridiculous. You’re basically saying if you take any historical or popular figure in society and compare them to anybody it’s just racist to that whole race. There is no logic there.

I never said hey go up to a native and call him a redskin. I’m saying people aren’t as offended as you say. You’re speaking for a whole race when the number says it. 9 out of 10. Like damn maybe if we stopped the victimization in this country and treated each other equally then we could get somewhere but we still have people like you speaking for races and other people. How ironic
 
Cippy91 said:
Who the fuck went back into February to resurrect this shit? Anyways, I found it funny and stupid. Sorry you didn’t.
Click to expand...

why does it matter? Would you rather have yet another thread started discussing the same subject? I was told that new threads about the same thing shouldn't be started. The easy solution in your case would be to simply pass it by.
 
Cippy91 said:
I’m speaking in general, yes the majority of people know Pocahontas as a Disney character. That’s what I’m talking about. Not the real pocohontas considering we don’t actually know what she looked like. I was just saying as an example, as the pocohontas a majority of America knows. What’s the difference? You’re still comparing somebody to something. Yes trump used this in a derogatory term but to say it’s racist is just ridiculous. You’re basically saying if you take any historical or popular figure in society and compare them to anybody it’s just racist to that whole race. There is no logic there.

I never said hey go up to a native and call him a redskin. I’m saying people aren’t as offended as you say. You’re speaking for a whole race when the number says it. 9 out of 10. Like damn maybe if we stopped the victimization in this country and treated each other equally then we could get somewhere but we still have people like you speaking for races and other people. How ironic
Click to expand...

I just don't understand propagating stupidity. Reread what I first wrote. I think it's clear. Pocahontas does not represent ALL Native Americans. Intentionally generalizing is racist. Calling all Asians Bruce Lee whether they are Chinese or Japanese or Korean etc is racist. And it's racist even if 9 out 10 Asians disagree.

You say Trump uses the term in a derogatory manner yourself!!! What the fuck is the problem here anyhow? Using something about race as a derogatory term is what racism is!

My point is if you can't walk up to a Native American and say he is a redskin then maybe it isn't okay. Just maybe. Maybe it's offensive. And I am not speaking for any race. I'm speaking for decency. It isn't decent. And victimization doesn't mean what you think it does--it is unfair treatment and not the state of being a victim--and you actually kind of sound like you're trying to prove my point by saying it that way, which is actually ironic.

What's the point of your position, cippy? That people shouldn't be bothered by things? Because Disney made Peter Pan where Natives are called "savages" and shit like that then so what? Everyone has seen Peter Pan. Just because something is mainstream does not mean it is not offensive. So, why take this position? Just because you think it's no big deal? This is the thing (and this keeps coming up in here) it's not your story, so why dig your heels in?
 
CupWizier said:
why does it matter? Would you rather have yet another thread started discussing the same subject? I was told that new threads about the same thing shouldn't be started. The easy solution in your case would be to simply pass it by.
Click to expand...
I don’t care it’s just weird when you open your notifications and it’s from a thread in ferbruary.
 
Propagandist said:
I just don't understand propagating stupidity. Reread what I first wrote. I think it's clear. Pocahontas does not represent ALL Native Americans. Intentionally generalizing is racist. Calling all Asians Bruce Lee whether they are Chinese or Japanese or Korean etc is racist. And it's racist even if 9 out 10 Asians disagree.

You say Trump uses the term in a derogatory manner yourself!!! What the fuck is the problem here anyhow? Using something about race as a derogatory term is what racism is!

My point is if you can't walk up to a Native American and say he is a redskin then maybe it isn't okay. Just maybe. Maybe it's offensive. And I am not speaking for any race. I'm speaking for decency. It isn't decent. And victimization doesn't mean what you think it does--it is unfair treatment and not the state of being a victim--and you actually kind of sound like you're trying to prove my point by saying it that way, which is actually ironic.

What's the point of your position, cippy? That people shouldn't be bothered by things? Because Disney made Peter Pan where Natives are called "savages" and shit like that then so what? Everyone has seen Peter Pan. Just because something is mainstream does not mean it is not offensive. So, why take this position? Just because you think it's no big deal? This is the thing (and this keeps coming up in here) it's not your story, so why dig your heels in?
Click to expand...
Okay except nobody goes up to Asians and references to them as Bruce lee or natives and says “hey Pocahontas!”. Derogatory and racist are different. You can say something negatively and not intend for it to be some racist statement. That’s not hard to understand.

My position is that it’s dangerous to freedom of speech and society in general when you start calling everything racist. That word has been so watered down, I have seen it wrongly accused and thrown around. But I mean hey if you wanna live in a world where everybody you disagree with is racist or whatever then go for it.
 
Cippy91 said:
I don’t care it’s just weird when you open your notifications and it’s from a thread in ferbruary.
Click to expand...

Nobody else brought it up so you must have cared. You could have just as easily ignored it. :dunno:
 
Cippy91 said:
Okay except nobody goes up to Asians and references to them as Bruce lee or natives and says “hey Pocahontas!”. Derogatory and racist are different. You can say something negatively and not intend for it to be some racist statement. That’s not hard to understand.

My position is that it’s dangerous to freedom of speech and society in general when you start calling everything racist. That word has been so watered down, I have seen it wrongly accused and thrown around. But I mean hey if you wanna live in a world where everybody you disagree with is racist or whatever then go for it.
Click to expand...
Cippy, you're fishing for seaweed...
 
riverman said:
Cippy, you're fishing for seaweed...
Click to expand...
I’m just stating my opinion on it. I obviously don’t agree with trump but I wouldn’t jump and call it racist. It’s a generalized derogatory thing to say. I don’t know. Maybe I’m wasting my time on this subject.
 
Cippy91 said:
I’m just stating my opinion on it. I obviously don’t agree with trump but I wouldn’t jump and call it racist. It’s a generalized derogatory thing to say. I don’t know. Maybe I’m wasting my time on this subject.
Click to expand...
you'd be wrong......you wouldn't call an African American "sambo" even though it's a storybook character....you wouldn't call a jewish person "Speilberg" and on and on...you seem to just want to debate political correctness when it should be looked at as correctness period. There's no debate in this topic to be had. Samuel Jackson called Tim Roth "Ringo" in pulp fiction...not something you'd call an English person in my book...personally I don't care who Warren's parents self identified with....maybe they were reincarnationists...who knows? Point is...Trump is trolling her and only to prop up ignorance and get those ignorant cheers going...problem is, nobody is cheering
 
Cippy91 said:
I don’t care it’s just weird when you open your notifications and it’s from a thread in ferbruary.
Click to expand...

Someone posted an article that just came out that related to the original topic.
 
riverman said:
you'd be wrong......you wouldn't call an African American "sambo" even though it's a storybook character....you wouldn't call a jewish person "Speilberg" and on and on...you seem to just want to debate political correctness when it should be looked at as correctness period. There's no debate in this topic to be had. Samuel Jackson called Tim Roth "Ringo" in pulp fiction...not something you'd call an English person in my book...personally I don't care who Warren's parents self identified with....maybe they were reincarnationists...who knows? Point is...Trump is trolling her and only to prop up ignorance and get those ignorant cheers going...problem is, nobody is cheering
Click to expand...
You guys confuse me. On one end calling somebody pocohontas is fine just as long as it’s a term of endearment. On the other hand it’s apparently racist. Which is it? You’re taking people and generalizing them into a whole race. I’m talking individuals. I’m not saying hey it should be cool to run up to any native and call them Pocahontas.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top