Politics Elizabeth Warren doubles down

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Trump is the most important racist that ever lived, and that's a fact.
Yeah...that's not a fact. Guarantee you there won't be 1% as many books/movies about Trump's presidency as about WWII. Trump may be racist...or he may simply be ignorant...but he's certainly not that important.
 
I already asked this question and never got an answer. Typical of Republican twisted spinning to come up with these mythical claims.

Democrats never and come up with mythical claims.


Both parties are the same.
 
Yeah...that's not a fact. Guarantee you there won't be 1% as many books/movies about Trump's presidency as about WWII. Trump may be racist...or he may simply be ignorant...but he's certainly not that important.

Then on the other hand....
 
Yeah...that's not a fact. Guarantee you there won't be 1% as many books/movies about Trump's presidency as about WWII. Trump may be racist...or he may simply be ignorant...but he's certainly not that important.

I think him being divisive is actually starting to unite people.

But Hitler was easily the most important racist.
 
Yeah...that's not a fact. Guarantee you there won't be 1% as many books/movies about Trump's presidency as about WWII. Trump may be racist...or he may simply be ignorant...but he's certainly not that important.
WWII was a pretty big deal.

But, nevertheless, Trump is eroding the Presidency at an alarming rate.

Look at how many in the upper echelons of the White House have called him dumb, stupid, a moron, has the awareness of a fifth or sixth grader. I think it's about 7 people. Can't you see a pattern here?
 
I think him being divisive is actually starting to unite people.

But Hitler was easily the most important racist.
Hitler was never able to take down the United States government. But I'll give you that he did kill a lot of people because of their race.
 
C'mon dude...you're better than this.
It was the Florida State cheer long before the Braves started using it.

When I was laughing at Willie Taggert I noticed there was a FSU forum called "the reservation"...
 
I already asked this question and never got an answer. Typical of Republican twisted spinning to come up with these mythical claims.


Okay, lets see if this sheds a little light on the subject.

https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-...behind-elizabeth-warren-and-her-native-ameri/

?

The first mention

Warren’s heritage wasn’t something she brought up during her 2012 Senate race against Republican Scott Brown.

The questions started with a Boston Herald story on April 27, 2012.

"Elizabeth Warren’s avowed Native American heritage — which the candidate rarely if ever discusses on the campaign trail — was once touted by embattled Harvard Law School officials who cited her claim as proof of their faculty’s diversity," the article began. What the article revealed dated back more than a decade to diversity records kept by Harvard.

At a time when law schools faced public pressure to show greater ethnic diversity within their faculty, the university’s Crimson newspaper quoted a law school spokesman in 1996 saying Warren was Native American.

The Boston Globe followed the Herald with a report that the Association of American Law Schools listed Warren as a minority law teacher each year from 1986 to 1994. In that time, Warren went from being a law professor at the University of Texas, to the University of Pennsylvania, and finally in 1995 to Harvard University.

That association received faculty lists from law schools and sent personal profile forms to new faculty members. The group first asked about minority status in 198



and this little tidbit

Warren’s opponent Scott Brown jumped on the revelations and called on her to apologize for Harvard having touted her dubious ethnic roots. Brown also said she had used an invented minority status to make herself more attractive to law schools.

Warren refused to apologize, saying she didn’t know Harvard was promoting her that way. She did confirm, however, that she had told the law school association that she held a minority status.

"I listed myself (in the) directory in the hopes that might mean that I would be invited to a luncheon, a group something, with people who are like I am," Warren told reporters May 3, 2012. "Nothing like that ever happened. That was absolutely not the use for it and so I stopped checking it off."
 
Okay, lets see if this sheds a little light on the subject.

https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-...behind-elizabeth-warren-and-her-native-ameri/

?

The first mention

Warren’s heritage wasn’t something she brought up during her 2012 Senate race against Republican Scott Brown.

The questions started with a Boston Herald story on April 27, 2012.

"Elizabeth Warren’s avowed Native American heritage — which the candidate rarely if ever discusses on the campaign trail — was once touted by embattled Harvard Law School officials who cited her claim as proof of their faculty’s diversity," the article began. What the article revealed dated back more than a decade to diversity records kept by Harvard.

At a time when law schools faced public pressure to show greater ethnic diversity within their faculty, the university’s Crimson newspaper quoted a law school spokesman in 1996 saying Warren was Native American.

The Boston Globe followed the Herald with a report that the Association of American Law Schools listed Warren as a minority law teacher each year from 1986 to 1994. In that time, Warren went from being a law professor at the University of Texas, to the University of Pennsylvania, and finally in 1995 to Harvard University.

That association received faculty lists from law schools and sent personal profile forms to new faculty members. The group first asked about minority status in 198



and this little tidbit

Warren’s opponent Scott Brown jumped on the revelations and called on her to apologize for Harvard having touted her dubious ethnic roots. Brown also said she had used an invented minority status to make herself more attractive to law schools.

Warren refused to apologize, saying she didn’t know Harvard was promoting her that way. She did confirm, however, that she had told the law school association that she held a minority status.

"I listed myself (in the) directory in the hopes that might mean that I would be invited to a luncheon, a group something, with people who are like I am," Warren told reporters May 3, 2012. "Nothing like that ever happened. That was absolutely not the use for it and so I stopped checking it off."

Sounds like a really serious crime. Why hasn't she been locked up?
 
I already asked this question and never got an answer. Typical of Republican twisted spinning to come up with these mythical claims.

Okay, lets see if this sheds a little light on the subject.

https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-...behind-elizabeth-warren-and-her-native-ameri/

?

The first mention

Warren’s heritage wasn’t something she brought up during her 2012 Senate race against Republican Scott Brown.

The questions started with a Boston Herald story on April 27, 2012.

"Elizabeth Warren’s avowed Native American heritage — which the candidate rarely if ever discusses on the campaign trail — was once touted by embattled Harvard Law School officials who cited her claim as proof of their faculty’s diversity," the article began. What the article revealed dated back more than a decade to diversity records kept by Harvard.

At a time when law schools faced public pressure to show greater ethnic diversity within their faculty, the university’s Crimson newspaper quoted a law school spokesman in 1996 saying Warren was Native American.

The Boston Globe followed the Herald with a report that the Association of American Law Schools listed Warren as a minority law teacher each year from 1986 to 1994. In that time, Warren went from being a law professor at the University of Texas, to the University of Pennsylvania, and finally in 1995 to Harvard University.

That association received faculty lists from law schools and sent personal profile forms to new faculty members. The group first asked about minority status in 198



and this little tidbit

Warren’s opponent Scott Brown jumped on the revelations and called on her to apologize for Harvard having touted her dubious ethnic roots. Brown also said she had used an invented minority status to make herself more attractive to law schools.

Warren refused to apologize, saying she didn’t know Harvard was promoting her that way. She did confirm, however, that she had told the law school association that she held a minority status.

"I listed myself (in the) directory in the hopes that might mean that I would be invited to a luncheon, a group something, with people who are like I am," Warren told reporters May 3, 2012. "Nothing like that ever happened. That was absolutely not the use for it and so I stopped checking it off."


Lanny will just ignore this and bring it up fresh tomorrow.
 
Okay, lets see if this sheds a little light on the subject.

https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-...behind-elizabeth-warren-and-her-native-ameri/

?

The first mention

Warren’s heritage wasn’t something she brought up during her 2012 Senate race against Republican Scott Brown.

The questions started with a Boston Herald story on April 27, 2012.

"Elizabeth Warren’s avowed Native American heritage — which the candidate rarely if ever discusses on the campaign trail — was once touted by embattled Harvard Law School officials who cited her claim as proof of their faculty’s diversity," the article began. What the article revealed dated back more than a decade to diversity records kept by Harvard.

At a time when law schools faced public pressure to show greater ethnic diversity within their faculty, the university’s Crimson newspaper quoted a law school spokesman in 1996 saying Warren was Native American.

The Boston Globe followed the Herald with a report that the Association of American Law Schools listed Warren as a minority law teacher each year from 1986 to 1994. In that time, Warren went from being a law professor at the University of Texas, to the University of Pennsylvania, and finally in 1995 to Harvard University.

That association received faculty lists from law schools and sent personal profile forms to new faculty members. The group first asked about minority status in 198



and this little tidbit

Warren’s opponent Scott Brown jumped on the revelations and called on her to apologize for Harvard having touted her dubious ethnic roots. Brown also said she had used an invented minority status to make herself more attractive to law schools.

Warren refused to apologize, saying she didn’t know Harvard was promoting her that way. She did confirm, however, that she had told the law school association that she held a minority status.

"I listed myself (in the) directory in the hopes that might mean that I would be invited to a luncheon, a group something, with people who are like I am," Warren told reporters May 3, 2012. "Nothing like that ever happened. That was absolutely not the use for it and so I stopped checking it off."

That seems consistent - she did not benefit from it (although arguably Harvard did).

barfo
 
Sounds like a really serious crime. Why hasn't she been locked up?

Damn, Cup, ease up..just showing Lanny where the whole thing came from.

I think the piece does a good job of explaining what she did, and she explained why.

I personally could care less, but to say that it never happened, or did not help her is ridiculous

Was it an honest mistake? Might be more believable had she not been so tight with the clinton cartel
 
That seems consistent - she did not benefit from it (although arguably Harvard did).

barfo


Hahaha, come on, bro, I know you are the King of Sling, but the very fact that Harvard claimed her on the "minority" rolls, shows preference.
 
Damn, Cup, ease up..just showing Lanny where the whole thing came from.

I think the piece does a good job of explaining what she did, and she explained why.

I personally could care less, but to say that it never happened, or did not help her is ridiculous

Nobody says it didn't happen. But how do you think it helped her (that hasn't already been thoroughly debunked)?

Was it an honest mistake? Might be more believable had she not been so tight with the clinton cartel

It wasn't a mistake, she believed (rightly or wrongly) that she had a trace of Native blood. Not clear what the Clinton connection is, or how it's relevant to a law professor who was not in politics at the time.

barfo
 
Lanny will just ignore this and bring it up fresh tomorrow.

Thats ok, I think he may have hit his head too many times..but he and I can talk without the usual liberal deafness or extreme right bias causing a problem..
 
Hahaha, come on, bro, I know you are the King of Sling, but the very fact that Harvard claimed her on the "minority" rolls, shows preference.

How? Explain how her appearing on a list of minority faculty gives her a benefit?

barfo
 
Nobody says it didn't happen. But how do you think it helped her (that hasn't already been thoroughly debunked)?



It wasn't a mistake, she believed (rightly or wrongly) that she had a trace of Native blood. Not clear what the Clinton connection is, or how it's relevant to a law professor who was not in politics at the time.

barfo


Obviously gave her preference as a minority

the clinton connection would be past performance predicting future actions
 
Obviously gave her preference as a minority

What exactly does 'gave her preference as a minority' mean? Did she get better students in her classes? A better office? Higher salary? What, exactly, do you think she got?

the clinton connection would be past performance predicting future actions

That's a bit too deep for me, could you explain?

barfo
 
Don't fucking care. The card was played.

That seems kind of hypocritical. She didn't try to get a benefit, and she didn't get a benefit, but you think it's a terrible thing.

Meanwhile you support a guy who literally committed crimes to win the election.

barfo
 
Damn, Cup, ease up..just showing Lanny where the whole thing came from.

I think the piece does a good job of explaining what she did, and she explained why.

I personally could care less, but to say that it never happened, or did not help her is ridiculous

Was it an honest mistake? Might be more believable had she not been so tight with the clinton cartel

Is this similar to the trump mafia?
 
What exactly does 'gave her preference as a minority' mean? Did she get better students in her classes? A better office? Higher salary? What, exactly, do you think she got?



That's a bit too deep for me, could you explain?

barfo

Man, I know you are trolling me, bud, but see, if I dont answer, others will think I am afraid to hahahaha


Preference in being hired
 
That seems kind of hypocritical. She didn't try to get a benefit, and she didn't get a benefit, but you think it's a terrible thing.

Meanwhile you support a guy who literally committed crimes to win the election.

barfo

don't you love how these trumpets say they don't care when cornered but continually engage in the subject, lol.
 
That seems kind of hypocritical. She didn't try to get a benefit, and she didn't get a benefit, but you think it's a terrible thing.

Meanwhile you support a guy who literally committed crimes to win the election.

barfo

What you know is she made an unsupported claim of being of a minority group.
You know nothing of any specific crime by anyone I support.
 
What you know is she made an unsupported claim of being of a minority group.
You know nothing of any specific crime by anyone I support.

Even without documentation, it is not a crime to claim membership in a particular ethnic group.

I do know quite a bit about specific crimes by someone you support. I've been paying attention, rather than hiding my head in the sand.

barfo
 
Man, I know you are trolling me, bud, but see, if I dont answer, others will think I am afraid to hahahaha


Preference in being hired

Ok, that is where you are just factually wrong. She did not get any preference in hiring. This has been looked into multiple times. Here's a good summary.

If you want to dispute that, then I'll want evidence, not just "well, I think she did get preference, because that's what I want to believe".

barfo
 
Ok, that is where you are just factually wrong. She did not get any preference in hiring. This has been looked into multiple times. Here's a good summary.

If you want to dispute that, then I'll want evidence, not just "well, I think she did get preference, because that's what I want to believe".

barfo


I get it, it can not be proven, but even a blind man knows when he steps in shit. Far too many coincidences both on her part and on the schools part. But hey, believe what you want.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top