Elizabeth Warren Engaged in “Poached Diversity”
… that’s not my characterization, it’s Margery Eagan’s, not exactly a raving right winger.
To back up a little, last week, the Boston Herald learned that Elizabeth Warren, the Dem opponent of Senator Scott Brown (R-MA; can you believe it?!), had claimed Native American heritage.
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 Ivy League law school prominently touted Warren’s Native American background, however, in an effort to bolster their diversity hiring record in the ’90s as the school came under heavy fire for a faculty that was then predominantly white and male.
My question is, was this a factor in Harvard’s hiring of Ms. Warren?
A genealogist has now apparently determined that Ms. Warren is 1/32 Cherokee. However, this will not satisfy the Boston Herald’s Margery Eagan.
You’ve grabbed for minority cred without enduring the minority grief. It’s poached diversity. It’s glommed onto, what, five generations removed, assuming there were some facts way, way back when, as your campaign aides claimed last night. …
Here’s the problem for you, Liz: We’re not talking some elaborate, arcane, confusing financial irregularity here that nobody can understand. Everybody gets this. It’s letting everyone think you’re something that you’re not. It’s letting stand the idea that you’re part of an aggrieved class of people. It’s a sin of omission, which is not as bad as a sin of commission — like, you know, the typical political ploy of pumping up resumes with fake claims of combat heroism and purple hearts. But it’s a huge problem nonetheless.
Warren is at least 1/32 Cherokee, and that seems to bother you. Scott Brown is 100% opposed to The Afordable Care Acts, has publicly stated that it would be harmful to families, and yet has enlisted his daughter in the plan. That does not seem to bother you – on the one hand he renounces the plan, on the other he takes advantage of it. I guess it doesn’t hurt his family at all. It just hurts other people’s families.
Please open both eyes when you look at the world.
OldTimeLefty
I read a newspaper biography of Warren, and it struck me as missing something. She started out as a housewife, then went to law school. She stayed home with the kids, and ran a law practice out of her living room. From this she becomes a law school professor. She moved through a couple of law schools,then to Harvard in ’96. She was then appointed to several political positions.
I don’t recall the article precisely but the trajectory of her career seemed unusual. I had the feeling that much was being leftout.
OTL,
Kind of like Warren Buffett denouncing tax rates and loopholes on the rich all the while taking full advantage. Eyes wide shut as usual OTL.
Max D
As usual you are worth ignoring. But for the sake of raising your consciousness above Neanderthal partisanship, I will try – the point is the selectivity of Monique’s writing, not the hypocracy of Scott Brown. What do you have to say about Brown’s denouncing the Affordable Care Act as harmful to families (his words, not mine)and then using it to benefit his family? Is Brown a sadist, trying to inflict harm on his own family by having them participate in a program which will hurt them?
OldTimeLefty
Elizabet Warren is a fraud. Only a moron would vote for her
Playing by the rules of the game is not an endorsement of the rules. The only “Neanderthal partisan” here is OTL for ignoring that simple logical point.
See also: “You aren’t a real libertarian if you use the roads.”
OTL,
My Neanderthal senses tells me when someone eviscerates your point, you recoil into liberal elitist mode and resort to name calling. As to your question, the two aren’t comparable. As Dan said, “Playing by the rules is not an endorsement.” Claiming your Cherokee to satisfy diversity statistics when you’re not or it can’t be proven is plain fraud. Even a caveman can see it.
Wait, she claimed to be part Native American and was genetically proven to be so but she’s the bad guy here? I think it Mrs Eagan who is in the wrong. If she was questioning the “blackness” of a man who claimed to be part African American we would all be calling her a racist. Since when does one need to endure some “minority grief” to qualify as being part of an race? So are Obama’s daughters not really black by Mrs. Eagans standards? They surely have endured very little ‘minority grief’ with their parents being the millionaire president and first lady with hundreds of white people waiting on them as part of the white house staff… Furthermore, it’s an unfounded assumption that she has endured no grief. Who’s to say mean little kids never danced around her in a school yard skipping, patting their hands over their mouths while humming, mocking a Native American chant because Ms. Warren wore a feather in her hair one day…. Did it happen, maybe not, but how does Mrs. Eagan know? This is a baseless, useless article by Mrs. Eagan. Mrs. Eagan was hard pressed to find something about Elizabeth Warren’s character to attack. She reached too far here. She should have stuck to issues.
Does anyone know if there’s any statistical data anywhere showing what percentage of Americans can claim 1/32 Native American ancestry based on genetic testing?
That question aside, I wonder if progressives realize the danger this case presents to affirmative action and other race-based programs. If anyone can claim any ethnic heritage he chooses without regard to an objective standard, then the whole racial spoils system erected by progressives collapses. Defending the system would require establishing legal standards for determining race. That would drag up unpleasant memories of racial purity laws from the slavery and Jim Crow eras or from National Socialist Germany.
Posted by Rich:
“Wait, she claimed to be part Native American and was genetically proven to be so but she’s the bad guy here? I think it Mrs Eagan who is in the wrong. If she was questioning the “blackness” of a man who claimed to be part African American we would all be calling her a racist.”
First, nothing has been “genetically proven”. A genealogist has found a great gradmother who “may” be Native American (I hate that term. When the Indians arrived here, they killed the Native Americans they found. The previous “Native Americans” were caucazoid.)
“If she was questioning the “blackness” of a man who claimed to be part African American”.
I think Egan mentioned the four white Boston firefighters who claimed “Blackness” based on a photo of their grandmother. They were accused of being racist and hooted out of town.
“Does anyone know if there’s any statistical data anywhere showing what percentage of Americans can claim 1/32 Native American ancestry based on genetic testing?”
Under the old “Corruption of the Blood” law, if you were less than 1/16th black, you were white. Consequently any children of Thomas Jefferson and Sally Hemmings would have been “white”. Or, perhaps, one generation away.
I don’t have a figure, but a large number of American blacks can claim 1/32nd Native American, largely Cherokee. Look at the pictures of the “Trail of Tears” and see who is doing the tote and carry.
“Wait, she claimed to be part Native American and was genetically proven to be so but she’s the bad guy here?”
Genetically proven? Where did you read that gem? The researcher that found a document where her great-great-great grandmother said she was Cherokee is not exactly a genetic test. Even the guy that found the document said it needed more research.
When someone asks you if you mentioned your Native American heritage during a hiring process, your answer shouldn’t be, “I don’t recall.”
The issue isn’t her heritage, it is her lack of integrity. Love the contortions people put themselves through trying to excuse her actions…
Posted by Mike678
“The issue isn’t her heritage, it is her lack of integrity.”
“There are no degrees of honor”
Those who follow such things may recall that “minority hiring” was a very big deal at Harvard Law during the period Ms. Warren was hired. “Students were demonstrating”, “Demanding more minority faculty”, etc. (Google it) I have often wondered if that is how Obama ended up on the Law Review.
All this racial heritage stuff is bullsh*t and I’m sick of it.
My family is very mixed and it may be interesting,but that’s it-there’s no further significance.
Short example of ridiculous “racial diversity”-my daughter and a friend of hers graduated high school together and her friend got an award based on Hispanic background and academic achievement.Both girls were half
Hispanic,but my daughter didn’t have an Hispanic surname because it’s on her mother’s side that she is Hispanic.
The other girl’s father was Hispanic so her name was also.My daughter had higher grades,but her name disqualified her.Is that stupid or what?I’m sure some leftist social engineer can explain it to me.
Joe, I think you have to “proclaim” yourself. My daughter, whose mother is Cuban, was welcomed into the Ivy League as an “Hispanic”. Her last name is the same as mine and she is blonde like her mother. She was assigned to the Hispanic dorm. She couldn’t deal with that. So she sneaked herself into the Asian dorm.
I was amused that “race” was never mentioned, these were “affinity dorms”.
Elizabet Warren is a fraud. Only a moron would vote for her
Posted by Doug Meisner at May 1, 2012 11:03 PM
I read this comment on the morning of the 2nd with the word “moron” spelled “morion” which for obvious reasons I found funny. I did not know that a posted comment could be corrected for spelling after the fact. To whomever tidied up for Doug you may want to add the “h” to poor Elizabet. More on that later.