« Obama Evolves | Main | The People Are Revolting »

Friday, May 11, 2012


Bill Fleming

Clever headline, KB.

larry kurtz

Like some earth hater blogger in South Dakota has any insight on a Senate race in Massachusetts:


larry kurtz

Wait a minute: Blanchard's post looks up a dead horse's ass and stirs more racial hatred in a reactionary ruse to a possible UN recommendation that could return tribal control of the Black Hills in the chemical toilet to those whom would heal her.

larry kurtz

He plagiarized it, Bill:



How does she compare to legal-size copier paper?


I do not doubt that Elizabeth Warren was qualified for the positions she had. And it may be true that she checked the box based upon "family lore". If this is the case, I do not believe when her employers listed her minority status it was "fraudulent". Fraud, I believe, has to be an "intentional deception". If this is the case, then fraud does not apply.
However, it seems to me that when she started checking boxes, she should have had something more than "family lore". I am pretty sure a judge would not accept that in a courtroom. I also wonder if she checked that box on student applications. Someone has pointed out it is not so much whether she was qualified, but how many other people did not get the job because she aced them out with her Native American status.
I do not know a lot of Native Americans, but I suspect most would laugh at her "Native American" status. She was not raised as Native American. She is not on any Native American Rolls. And her claim of quantum blood is dubious at best.

Ken Blanchard

Bill: I got it from Mark Steyn. This story is awash in such puns. My other favorite is the "Tee Pee Party."




And especially this:


Bill Fleming

Good links, Anne. I wonder if KB ever gets weary of having to defend a party full of jackasses?

(Besides, I thought being jackasses was our job. LOL.)

Donald Pay

Welcome to America, where race matters. Interesting you look at things from the white perspective, as if Warren is trying to get something that rightfully belongs to "real whites." This, of course, is the same perspective, though inverted, that the US used to deny tribes and individual Indians their treaty rights.

If you are 1/32nd Native American that would mean exactly what? Well, in many places, including South Dakota, it could mean you are discriminated against. It depends whether you "look Indian," of course, because most racists are very shallow. There are businessmen in Rapid City who have similar "blood quantum" or even more who have taken great pains to disown their Lakota heritage. Sad. To some people in Rapid City, 1/32nd is too much Indian. See, to be too Indian in Rapid City might means there's likely a cost you are going to pay for your existence here on earth.

This is the sad legacy of the founding of our country, where our otherwise great founding documents were racist to the core.

Ken Blanchard

No, Bill. I figure that's your job.


Donald, it has been my experience that most people in SD can get along with just about anybody, regardless of race. Yes, most of us have certain biases based upon race. You do, I do, and just about everybody else does. This goes for Native Americans, Blacks, and Hispanics as well. Often this has something to do with our experiences of people from that race. However some people actually get past that point and get to know people individually. I believe discriminating against someone because of their race is an injustice. This goes for reserving certain slots for people of certain races that others who are just as qualified or even more so get overlooked because someone from another race took that spot.
Back in the 1980's I called a potential employer about applying for an advertised position. I was essentially told I had no chance of being hired because they were looking for someone who was not, shall we say, quite as white as I am. I have talked to my students about people who are the first woman, first Black person, first this or that to hold certain positions. My comment is that I am looking forward to the day when we do not have to point out these "firsts". However there seem to be too many people who are so focused on race that we forget qualifications. The current President is an example of that.

Ken Blanchard

Anne: your two links suggest 1) that Ms. Warren "did not claim Minority Status" and 2) that her claim of minority status was genuine even if she is only 1/32nd Native. Do you see no logical problems with that defense? The first claim is false. She did identify herself as a minority in a place where it counted, see above. The second claim is misleading. There is in fact no evidence that she has any Native American ancestry at all.

You rarely answer a question I pose to you, but try this one. If a conservative Republican were to falsely claim Native American or African ancestry, how would the press treat him?


You are not precisely correct in what Anne's first link says KB. What it shows is Warren identified herself as a minority in ONE place where it MIGHT have counted, but according to the universities that hired her, it did not. In two other instances where she stood to gain by identifying as a minority, she specifically did not. And by the way, blood quantum to be considered Cherokee is 1/32.

There is no way to absolutely prove the truthfulness or mendacity of Warren's claim of family lore leading her to believe she has native ancestors or the validity of her stated motives for saying she did. However, if personal gain were her motivation, it would seem she would have been consistent in making the claim.

Not to preempt anything Anne may say, but I will offer my take how the press would treat a conservative in this circumstance: Pretty much the same as Warren which includes being critical. Then the conservative would start whining about the liberal media and a bunch of us would roll our eyes and say: "ya, right".

Donald Pay

Since we are talking about "pretence" regarding race, KB, let's understand that there are a lot of people here today who are on a long list of people who are pretending to be "white."

White was not a race in America. It was a tribal identification, principally applied to northern European immigrants. When you read the history of this country, you understand that immigrants from southern and eastern Europe, anyone with any Black ancestory (no matter how distant), and anyone with any Indian or Mexican ancestory (no matter how distant) were not counted in any census or in society as "white." Even Irish, Cornish and Welch immigrants were considered "non-white" for a generation. Becoming "white" meant you could participate fully in the rights and benefits of our society.

Sometimes people would pass for white, but there was generally a governmental or societal stamp of approval that was required to actually become "white" here in America. Thus, many eastern and southern Europeans passed into whitedom only because people previously declared "white" began to need them in order to keep other "non-whites" down or out of power. Often people became "white" during statehood entry, because the population of white population mattered. Also, there was an economic component. Eastern and Southern European immigrants who mined in the southwest passed into whitedom in order to discourage them from joining unions with Mexican miners.

In this sense, I suspect Warren's family passed into the "white" category a few generations ago, even if she had some Native American or, God forbid, Irish ancestory. Oh, the horror.

There are societal, economic and cultural ramifications to claiming ethnicity. Obama is multi-ethnic, but identifies as "black," probably because that's what eveyone told him he was growing up. It's what everyone would think just looking at him. Others are told they are "white," but have some quantum of a racial minority, and may begin to self-identify as a minority. Many students now eschew "white" or "black" or "Native American." They prefer "multiethnic."


"I have a dream that one day this nation will rise up and live out the true meaning of its creed: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal.""

And we find ourselves, as a nation, moving further from that dream than at any point since those words were first spoken. Some seek to divide us for power, some for money and some for envy but those who divide us will destroy us, if we fail to rebuke them.

larry kurtz

Cory Heidelberger from Madville Times:

"Why does South Dakota’s right-wing blogosphere have to suck so badly?"


"Despite the ongoing controversy over Democratic challenger Elizabeth Warren’s past claims of Native American heritage in professional circles, she and Republican incumbent Scott Brown remain tied in Massachusetts’ U.S. Senate race with 45% of the vote each."


Donald Pay


Republicans here in Wisconsin are actually defending Scott Walker's recently disclosed comments from January 2011, in which he told a wealthy billionaire that his strategy was to "divide and conquer." And it's not just aimed at unions. He's trying to pit blacks against whites in his TV advertising. He has purposely uses divisive tactics to pit people against each other, while his wealthy out-of-state supporters rip us off. This is either the dying gasp of the rightwing, or it is the beginning of fascism.


Donald, if you weren't so obsessed with the "rightwing" and (mistakenly) associating it with fascism (National Socialism ring a bell?), you'd admit there are politicians of both major parties that play "the race card", because it's cheap and easy. I'm not familiar with Walker's "recently disclosed comments", so I don't know the source, and charges of racism are made far too loosely and frequently in today's political atmosphere.

All I'll say is, those that play that "game" are playing with fire and I'm old enough to have seen those flames erupt before. The inflammatory coverage and blatant incitement fomented by race hustlers like the "Reverends" Al & Jesse over the Travon Martin shooting seem to serve no purpose than to create an atmosphere primed for violent outbreaks in our cities, perhaps for what they perceive as some perverse advantage to themselves and those they support (certainly not to those foolish enough to follow them as they'll be the ones to bear the brunt of the suffering to follow).

If my fears are correct, race relations in this county could be set back 50 years during the term of the first black President whose election should have fostered closure, now those wounds are being bled once again.

larry kurtz

Romney stumbling, trailing President Obama in New Hampshire:



So we have dueling headlines.

larry kurtz

He's a lot smarter than you are, Barnes; but, am having the same conversation with your near counterpart in Montana.


Abandon the earth hater party, Doug; and, join us in defeating your butt buddies in November.

Donald Pay

William, Republicans are expert at blaming people and playing the victim. We've got thugs like Zimmerman offing people, and you blaming the national black activists who have brought it to the attention of the nation. It would be nice for a change if Republicans would take up the cause of justice for minorities in this nation, like they used to, but that party has descended so far down the racist and fascist path that that's not going to happen. Here's a suggestion, William: if you don't want Rev Al and Jackson to show up, start standing up against racism and fascism yourself, rather than excusing it.

Ken Blanchard

A.I.: thanks for responding of behalf of Anne. As I expected, she did not. I was precisely correct regarding the headline of the Huff Post piece. It reads: "Elizabeth Warren Did Not Claim Minority Status, Records Show". Well she did, and they do.

I am not sure what you mean when you say "And by the way, blood quantum to be considered Cherokee is 1/32." By whose standards? To practice Native American Religion, you have to be an enrolled member of a tribe, or so I have heard from enrolled members of tribes.

Ms. Warren claimed Native American heritage in one place where it obviously counted, at least according to Harvard and the University of Pennsylvania. They claimed her as a minority. We know now that Ms. Warren was cited in a Fordham law review piece as Harvard's first women of color. So a lot was made of her claim. That she didn't repeat the claim suggests that she had no confidence in it. She didn't take any steps to correct the claim.

It is one thing to say that family lore has it that I have Cherokee blood. I can say the same, but I have never claimed as much on any questionnaire. If you are going to make the claim where it matters, you had better have some documentation. The burden of proof is on Ms. Warren.

The problem gets worse after the stories about a great great great grandmother. The Boston Globe reported "A record unearthed Monday shows that US Senate candidate Elizabeth Warren has a great-great-great grandmother listed in an 1894 document as a Cherokee, said a genealogist at the New England Historic and Genealogy Society." That is the basis of the 1/32nd Cherokee blood claim.

Now, however, the Boston Globe has issued a retraction. "Correction: Because of a reporting error, a story in the May 1 Metro section and the accompanying headline incorrectly described the 1894 document that was purported to list Elizabeth Warren’s great-great-great grandmother as a Cherokee. The document, alluded to in a family newsletter found by the New England Historic Genealogical Society, was an application for a marriage license, not the license itself. Neither the society nor the Globe has seen the primary document, whose existence has not been proven."

Someone tried to fabricate evidence for Ms. Warren's Cherokee ancestry. It is pretty clear by now that no such evidence exists.

I am guessing that Ms. Warren, in a moment of bad judgement, tried to capitalize on "family lore". She was sensible enough not to press the matter, but not responsible enough to correct it. Now that it matters in her campaign for Senate, she should have just come clean. Instead she doubled down. That makes her a liar.

Ken Blanchard

Donald: I find myself in the unusual position of agreeing with your excellent post. Yes, Of course. There is no such thing as "White". However, does that not also logically entail that there is no such thing as "non-White"? If that is true, what does it mean for Affirmative Action policies?


Cops, Witnesses Back Up George Zimmerman's Version of Trayvon Martin Shooting

"The lead investigator on the case, Officer Christopher Serino, wrote that Zimmerman could be heard "yelling for help as he was being battered by Trayvon Martin."

"Two police officers reported that when they arrived at the scene of the shooting, Zimmerman seemed to have a battered nose and bloodied face. One wrote that his "facial area was bloodied," and the back of his clothing was soiled with wet grass.

"Zimmerman was also bleeding from the nose and the back of his head," Officer Ricardo Ayala wrote.

Another officer wrote, "I saw that Zimmerman's face was bloodied and it appeared to me that his nose was broken."

Witnesses, whose names were redacted from the report, also lent support to Zimmerman's version of what happened."

This story just gets worse and worse.

For anyone who automatically sided with Trayvon Martin and the race hustling Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson.

Should this not be the coup de grace to utterly disgrace those two men forever?

The comments to this entry are closed.