they were originally from GA, Spence was 100% correct...
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Hey, I am a tribal member.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Well you were right, and accurate facts are always worth getting out there, even when they undermine the joke I was trying to make.

I'm starting to really worry about what you are praying for.

well you can stop, because i’m praying for peace and prosperity. which in this country at this time, mostly means republicans.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

She claimed on her job app. that she was Native American? I didn't know that.

Did it help her get the job?

So isn't she Native American give she has like 5% - 10% NA blood?

"She claimed on her job app. that she was Native American? I didn't know that. "

yes, and Harvard advertised her as a Native American professor. Maybe she genuinely believed it. I find that unlikely.

"Did it help her get the job?"

As a professor at Harvard? You bet it did...

"So isn't she Native American give she has like 5% - 10% NA blood"

Nowhere near that much. In fact, the DNA test showed she had less than the average European Caucasian. I'm not sure why or how most of us have more Native American blood than her, but that's the math.

She lied to get a cushy, lucrative job in academia. It's not as bad as murder, and doesn't mean she couldn't make the country a better place. What it might mean, is that there are losers on both sides, and I'd really like a consistent set of standards applied to everyone. I doubt she has as many ethical lapses in her past as Trump does. But liberals don't want to discuss this at all, yet they want to dissect everything Trump does.

Most said they were unaware of her claims to Native American heritage and all but one of the 31 said those claims were not discussed as part of her hire. One professor told the Globe he is unsure whether her heritage came up, but is certain that, if it did, it had no bearing on his vote on Warren’s appointment.

https://www.bostonglobe.com/news/nat...O0K/story.html

Once again you are repeating mis-truths propagated by right wing media.
I do not agree with Warren on many issues but I do think that some of the issues she raises are important and need to be considered. Your admitted hate for her based on things you have seen in the media is sad, and tragicomical given your defense of most things Trump does including his claiming ethnicity falsely for financial gain.
The Boston Globe did an in depth article on this issue last September, I would challenge you to read it and then rebut it's factual evidence based on factual evidence that you can find.

https://www.bostonglobe.com/news/nat...O0K/story.html

Oh. So because the Harvard faculty said (after learning she lied)they didn't consider her Native American ancestry in the hiring, that makes it true? Harvard did a some advertising of their belief that they hired a Native American. They thought it was good, back then, that they had a Native American on their faculty.

The Boston Globe is liberal, Therefore it's automatically superior to everything that's not? You say so!!

Some alternate facts I guess. I've never heard her deny that she applied to Harvard as a Native American...

https://www.factcheck.org/2017/12/el...s-controversy/

I would think you would identify with her since you claim to be the token conservative for Connecticut
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Comments on Jim's link:

The following bolsers the arguement she listed herself as a minority back in possible 1986???

"The original Herald story also led to the disclosure that Warren had identified herself as a minority in the Association of American Law Schools directory for law professors from 1986 to 1995. It also came out that Warren was highlighted in a 2005 report from the University of Pennsylvania’s Minority Equity Committee as a minority recipient of a teaching award at Penn."

The following seems to bolster the arguement that she didn't try to take advantage of her minority status.

"It was also reported by the Boston Globe that Warren, on a 1973 application to the Rutgers Law School, declined to apply for admission under the Program for Minority Group Students, and that she listed herself as white on an undated personnel document at the University of Texas, where she worked from 1981 until 1987.

Warren, though, denies that she ever claimed to be a minority to secure employment. She said that she has always been recruited by employers based on her work.

“I never used it to get ahead,” she said in the Nov. 27 interview with Cooper. “I never used it to get into school. I never used it to get a job.”

Oh, Paul, she says she never did it to get ahead, I see...

In this piece (which is not a hit piece on her, it states that there's no proof she used her ancestry to get ahead), we learn that she listed herself in professional directories (commonly used to recruit) as a minority. She claims, that she listed herself that way, in hopes of "connecting with people like me". And if you believe that, I have a beautiful bridge in Brooklyn I'd like to sell at a reasonable price.

She listed herself as a minority, starting the year before she started working at UPenn, until after she started working at Harvard. But that timing is just a coincidence.

She also won an award at UPenn as a minority faculty member.

If you are not inclined to doubt anything any liberal ever says, you'll be fine with this. If you are inclined to believe that liberals cannot tell the truth, you'll be certain there was fraud. The truth is in the middle somewhere..


https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...=.db7a362ab225

The article gave 2 pinccohios to Romney. Also, you claimed that she claimed she was Native American when she applied for a job yet you have not shown 1 iota of proof she infact did that. Your trying to claim that the reason she listed herself in the directory so that can help get her a job yet when she actually applied for said jobs there is no proof she claimed she was a Native American.

From your article:

The Fact Checker expects accusers to satisfy the burden of proof for their charges. That was the case when Sen. Harry Reid (D-Nev.) said that GOP presidential nominee Mitt Romney tried to avoid taxes with offshore accounts. We awarded four Pinocchios to Reid because the senator lacked conclusive evidence — or much evidence at all, for that matter. We’ve also knocked the Obama campaign repeatedly for jumping to unwarranted conclusions about Mitt Romney’s record at Bain Capital.

The outstanding questions about Warren’s directory listing — and her relying on family lore rather than official documentation to make an ethnic claim — certainly raise serious concerns about Warren’s judgment. But in the debate, the Republican incumbent conflated conjecture and sketchy information to make a claim not supported by the available evidence, and so he earns Two Pinocchios.