Elizabeth Warren falsely represented herself as Native American to get a plum job at Harvard. That’s Theft by Deception, and Harvard has a duty to claw back the salary she stole
10
That white woman Warren, held herself out to be Native American in order to win a favourable position at the Harvard Law School, speaks to morality and integrity. Or a serious lack of both. In that respect she is no better than Clinton, or for that matter, Trump.
Move on, Dems; find someone better.
And beware of Gillibrand, an even bigger shape-shifter than Warren.
14
Elizabeth Warren is a fighter. That is just what we need against Donald J. Chaos & Co. A wimp ain't gonna win.
7
There is no perfect way to deal with bullies like Trump. Warren did the same thing Obama did with his birth certificate.
7
Senator Warren, please be proud of who you are. Let the dogs bark.
7
This issue is a nonsense issue, promoted by the grotesquely hypocritical racist, misogynist, oligarchic republican party in a feeble attempt to destroy Senator Warren. She is a real threat to their endless war on this country's working and middle classes, and they will use this most absurd non-issue to try and discredit her.
12
Elizabeth, the country needs you. People need to know your gritty path; your contributions to society; your solutions to bring opportunity for all; and your flawless ability to neutralize the king of all bullies. You've got my respect and my vote.
5
This reeks of a typical Republican smear campaign. They fear Sen. Warren, and what she might do to their ultra-rich benefactors, so they pick out a triviality and scream "Scandal!" They did it to Hillary, and they'll do it to Sen. Warren, to distract attention from their own hideous behavior.
I don't care if she has 1/2 Native American ancestry, or 1/10,000th, and I'd vote for her in a heartbeat.
7
Were it not for the Loud-Mouthed-Liar-in-Chief this would have not been an "issue". Trump shows why we need to emphasize civics education and civility.
5
Apologize? For what exactly? Revealing that she has an umpteenth smidgen of native American blood? Who is offended by this? Who is she supposed to apologize to? For what?
This is the type of article that drives people to vote Republican.
13
What a blatant double standard is being applied here. Trump constantly misrepresents himself ("stable; genius; legal & cool; etc.), yet everyone just seems to shrug it off. Warren simply told the truth- namely, that she does in fact have Native American ancestry several generations back- & people get all up in arms?
This entire controversy is bogus. The DNA test is a non-issue. Most importantly, the DNA test does nothing to change the fact that Warren is the Democrats most effective leader, who represents the best hope for generating the enthusiasm among their base to assure a robust turnout in the 2020 election- something the Democrats will need in order to reclaim the White House & undo some of the massive damage inflicted by our felon-in-chief.
11
The Pocahontas jibe will be reiterated time and again but I think that Elizabeth Warren just needs to say that it was pride in having a background, however small, that connected her to the Native Americans. Pride, nothing else.
5
Excuse me, have I missed something? We have a President that lies brazenly many times a day, about things both earth-shatteringly important and trivial, and we are worried about this? Massive example of how there is one standard for Republicans and quite another for Democrats. Why?
13
Can we PLEASE focus on issues, and not this claptrap trivia that drives our attention from serious consideration of our futures.
The Secretary General of the United Nations warns that we have but a few years to act to save our species yet we amuse our intellects with questions of whether a potential presidential candidate is 1/64th or 1/32nd Native American.
Who could care? And why?
9
She'd be too old and absurd to be Prez. As far as being Commander in Chief, internationally she'd have the respect of a cab driver. As one of the female commentators herein (quite correctly) opined, Liz is just another version of Hilary's liabilities.
5
Warren claimed that she had Native American ancestry some time ago, because her family told her so. It was part of her identity, part of her family’s identity.
Then, after years of taking abuse for this claim from the birther crowd and other nasty folks, mostly on the right, she took a test which showed that she is most likely exactly as Native American as she has ever claimed.
So she told the truth.
Then some “Native voices” claimed offense that this “white women” was claiming Native American ancestry.
They are engaging in exactly the kind of “theft of identity” that they decry. They want to erase Warren’s Native American ancestors as if they had never lived.
They claim that Warren is a racial reductionist, while at the same time they reduce her identity, her heritage, her family story, to being just another “white” woman.
I am honestly disgusted with the complicity of many on the left with this assault on Warren’s identity.
The identity-obsessed wing of the left claims to respect people’s self-professed identities in nearly every circumstance. Every circumstance EXCEPT where a white appearing person has a slightly more complex, more nuanced story that they want to believe. Then they gang up to steal her identity, erase her heritage, and try to make every darker skinned ancestor she has disappear.
It’s shameful and revolting.
18
If the question of her Native American ancestry or lack thereof is the biggest worry we have to deal with coming out of a Warren administration -
are you serious?? How is this even an issue? Let the Republicans take the log out of their own eye, before complaining of the dust mote in Warren's!
9
The Democrats have increasingly become an anti-white party. They've always been hostile towards white males, but I think they're becoming increasingly hostile towards white women as well.
My guess is the Democrats will play to the anti-white bigotry of their base and nominate a minority candidate who will uphold left wing positions like affirmative action and open borders for illegal immigrants.
Even the Boston Globe came out against Warren recently: “While Warren is an effective and impactful senator with an important voice nationally, she has become a divisive figure."
8
Warren was goaded by Trump into taking the test. That says a lot about Warren. She should not run.
7
It has to be HRC 2020. No other choice is nominatable let alone electable.
1
Besides being tone-deaf on race issues, Warren represents the "professional" wing of the Democrapic Party, not the working class. If the Dems want to win in 2020, they have to embrace a real progressive. Bernie Sanders isn't one. Remember, he is one of the most fervent supporters of the F-35, the greatest boondoggle in the history of the world. Besides, he is too old. The most likely scenario for the Repooplicans is for Trump not to run. Then they will nominate Pence for Prez and Nikki Haley for VP. That ticket will win and Margaret Chase Smith will smile down on us from wherever she is now.
2
Re: the naïveté of Tribal members who criticized Warren:
Don't they realize that an enemy of their friend Elizabeth Warren is their Tribe's enemy also?
7
This brouhaha illuminates the Democrats' demographic disadvantage.
Dems would have it that they are the majority party, held back only by gerrymandering and voter suppression. Those two Republican tactics are indeed damaging to the republic, but if one wishes to understand the Dems' electoral difficulties, it is far more important to notice the fragility of their coalition.
The vast majority of Democratic-leaning voters have a positive or neutral opinion about DNA testing. It's just a scientific development that may turn out to be a silly fad, or possibly illuminating, but certainly no big deal. But here you have a Dem subgroup saying they would even vote for President Trump, in preference to a candidate unusually supportive of their concerns, but evincing an "incorrect" stance on this one matter.
The Democratic tent is made up of all these splintered groups nursing all these (generally justified) grudges, each group demanding purity on rarefied matters more symbolic than practical. Any candidate who seeks to satisfy all these splinter groups comes across as ridiculous to vast middle of the nation. And any candidate who does not seek to satisfy all these splinter groups loses pockets of voters necessary to win elections.
THAT is why the Dems struggle and will continue to struggle.
6
I think Elizabeth can do the best good if she stays in the Senate. Who would actually welcome the stress of being president?
1
She had been using family lore to her advantage and I believe she knew what she was doing. She just seems like 100% politician to me.
7
With politicians in general I think it is easier for them if they are younger and have less baggage. I know a bunch of educated women in their 70's who told me that experience is great but they think that for president we need someone in perfect health who will remain in perfect health without distractions.
1
Unlike me whose grandparents came to the U.S. in the late 19th Century and the early 20th Century as part of the great migration from Southern and Eastern Europe many Americans can trace ancestry to the colonial era. While I was growing up various people I met said that there was American Indian ancestry in their past.
Elizabeth Warren had been told that. It was a family history passed on from more than a century. She never used this to obtain admission to any college, graduate programs, or jobs. It was just a matter of family pride.
Trump jumped all over this which is not surprising as he has vitriol for anyone who is critical of him. She decided to take a DNA test to either confirm or deny this what she thought was a fact of family lore. The tester had no idea that it he was testing the DNA of a person in public life. The amount of Native American DNA in her system confirmed the family stories.
No reason to jump all over her. She didn't claim tribal admission. Simply that there was nothing that she had said ended up untrue, so unlike the thousands of statements made by President Trump.
5
“Of 71 current Law School professors and assistant professors, 11 are women, five are black, one is Native American and one is Hispanic,” The Harvard Crimson quotes then-Law School spokesman Mike Chmura as saying in a 1996 article. Can you guess who the “Native American” Harvard Law Professor was?
6
If she is a candidate, she has my vote. Her ancestry does not interest me; her ideas do.
4
Female, swing voter, been voting for decades. I do not see her appealing to the larger electorate outside of Massachusetts. For the love of God and country, will the Democrats please find a candidate who will appeal to the electorate.
4
Like others, I am somewhat astonished that this seems to be controversial. Ms. Warren verified her previous statement using science. She did not make any further claims or seek any advantage. Specifically, she did not claim any sort of tribal identity. I might have done the same if someone challenged the veracity of my claim as a 'Scandinavian American.'
5
I truly hope that she decides not to run. I like and respect her but I don’t think that she can win and her presence will only splinter the party.
2
I am surprised by the negative reactions to EW's DNA tests. Such tests, when correctly interpreted, are the best available evidence about a person's biological ancestry. Now, a person's social ancestry is another matter.
But, as important as such issues are, let us focus on the more relevant features and qualifications of candidates for high, public office as elected officials. When viewed from that perspective, EW is a stellar candidate and person.
7
This is a non issue. A greater concern is her one-track mind of beating up the financial industry indiscriminately.
I have voted for Sen Elizabeth Warren twice but I have vowed not to support her greater ambition should she entertain it. She is too extreme for the good of this country.
Why would I say that? Look, President Obama has single handedly lifted her out of obscurity but has she ever helped him in any of his initiatives in moderating this nation? More importantly, while the financial industry has been the favorite punching bag of the populists since the Great Recession - and rightly so with the behavior of Well Fargo and others - the financial industry touches many people's life. Using it as some red meat bait may be good for one's base but Ms Warren's indiscriminate attacks have caused more harm than good.
Sadly, Ms Warren's stunts before the election has demonstrated she will not grow any further. She can serve a function in Congress; beyond that, she is just not mature enough for higher office
2
What this illustrates is how effective the media and the financial elite who own them are at manipulating liberals to do their fighting for them. This is a ridiculous issue. Ridiculous because it is casting one of the strongest supporters of racial identity politics as a villain because of racial identity politics. Any of you who are perfect progressives, having never taken a misstep go ahead and cast the first stone.
Stand back and take a look at the big picture. Justice is not one issue. There are so many areas of injustice in the world and in our country. Ms Barnes declaration, as a liberal, that she would vote for Trump over Warren shows she is more interested in virtue signaling than virtue. It is idiotic; a fatal flaw in so called progressives that among the things they can't do is recognize any frailty other than than own spoiled child sensitivities. And worse, they think it is somehow more virtuous to take down one of their own team for a misstep than to offer understanding and compassion.
Warren is a very strong progressive candidate based on several advocacy issues. She may or may not be the best, but This issue, in the larger picture is a mote in the eye of a gnat. Quit letting the financial elite manipulate us against each other and against our natural allies, which are the vast vast supermajority, the 99%. We All have issues of Justice for which we want redress. Let's work together on that shall we?
9
After reading through many of these comments one thing is very clear. Warren is far too polarizing a figure to ever have a chance of winning the Presidency. She has somehow managed to divide progressives -who are the core of her base-about her suitability. The DNA tests resolved nothing, only managing to upset her allies on the left. Announcing it so close to the midterms was really off message. What an odd time to bring it up. She's coming off as being thin skinned... showing that she pays such attention to insignificant details that it becomes an obsession. Why not just apologize. Say I made a mistake and move on. Weird Trump and the right continue to mock her. What was accomplished? I believe in an unfortunate act of political suicide she will run. It will be a slow painful death as she loses primary after primary and is forced to withdraw. If she really cares about the Democratic Party she will spare herself and us this tragedy.
4
I like many of her policies. I don't think she is electable. I wish she would not run.
4
Making a huge issue out of this shows how skewed our priorities are these days. Warren is more on the side of working people, consumers, and all minorities including Native Americans than most politicians by far.
It is too bad she let Trump goad her, and it was not logical to think that DNA would stop a man with no character or respect for science or reality like Trump. But this is such a tiny flaw compared to other politicians that to castigate her to this degree seems absurd to me.
But now she'll have to be battered forever in today's hysterical atmosphere. We're losing sight of all the good Warren could do if not thwarted by the foul GOP, look at their sins in comparison. To have the left join in to minimize her huge potential is a sad thing to this reader.
6
Elizabeth Warren's characterization of her ethnicity and cultural identity may have had nothing at all to do with her being hired by Harvard University. Yet, I find that hard to believe. At the time, the university was being criticized for its relative lack of diversity. Tangentially related: It would be fascinating to see how Barack Obama characterized himself on his college applications, including the one at Harvard. We might gain insights about the application process from these advocates of identity politics.
5
Senator Warren made a misstep in an otherwise distinguished career in the law and in politics as a tireless champion of justice for all. Move on from this overblown issue or risk playing further into the hands of the current occupant of the White House who really could care less and only seeks to create chaos and discord.
1
Her DNA is not the handicap she can stand up and make people to move, her problem is her birthdate. The next president must be less than 50 to stimulate the millennials and the younger generations to invigorate the political life. She can be VP or cabinet member if an ally is elected, not president.
NYTimes, why are you reserrecting this issue? It's a big non-concern. Why not write about her ideas or her positions? If you want to write about something related to her DNA test, why not write that Trump hasn't paid her $1 million that he promised.
13
Her chances are now slim and only partially because she was so strident and ultimately sucked in on this GOP distraction. Sorry to say, but if she got through she would be so wound up by Republicans she would be made into a running media joke. She has good ideas and is capable but appears to want it too badly. The Dems have two options: Right the ship, go with the known, trusted hand and bring the US back into the International fold repairing the shattered norms: Biden. Go for inspirational, youthful energy (per Kennedy and Obama): O'Rourke.
5
@Realworld
Which of his names would Beto run under?
Would he admit his family's wealth?
Bobby Kennedy knew more about politics and the world. Beto is unschooled.
But then again, Sen. Warren is as old as Trump or Hillary with her cane. Could Hillary even step up into that podium to address Congress?
No bully ever called a skinny person fatso. Bullies are skilled at homing in on vulnerabilities, and Trump is the king of the bullies.
Warren is vulnerable to the claims about her Native American background. Why? Because Native Americans have been murdered, abused and robbed of even the lands to which they were exiled. Only after they have been almost exterminated and completely marginalized do we now look at their culture with admiration. This hypocrisy is what makes Warren's pride in her grandmother's story a vulnerability. Years ago no one who could pass for white would be claiming to have Native American ancestors, and in doing so bring down the full force of hatred and discrimination on their own heads.
10
Who cares?
Trump got that right.
5
Warren should be worried. I dunno if I'm even remotely representative of independents, but: I'm an independent who leans very strongly toward democrats I intend to NOT vote for Warren, in some part because of this idiotic claim.
6
I see it's never too early for the More Mao Than Thou folks to start holding their breath and stamping their feet to declare that one Dem candidate or another fails the purity test and will "never" receive the blessings of their vote, even against ... well, you know.
At what point will we stop flattering these juveniles by repeated suggestions that they are somehow the Democratic "base"?
The Democratic base are the people who consistently show up and vote for Democrats, not the tantrum-throwers. The party needs to stop trying to appease them.
16
My daughter is blue eyed blonde hair, her family came on the second ship into Jamestown. They have been in Georgia since 1800. They also have a story about a Native American great great great... grandmother. So we did a DNA on Ansestry and on 23 and me. One said she was part African American. The other one said she was 1% Native American and 2% West African. That all sort of makes sense. The census clearly shows her family had as many as 24-25 slaves Pre- Civil war. After the civil war they were fighting over who owned mules. So the Native American women was really part African slave and part Cherokee.
Most people who have been in Virginia to Florida since before 1800 are some Part Cherokee or Creek. They now go around and say they are, they just can’t get on the Dawes roles. The Cherokee and the other tribes aren’t splitting the gamboling revenue.
Ansestry and 23 and me are all making there money by saying find out what you are.
1
The issue is how she handles this. As a candidate, Bill Clinton weathered Jennifer Flowers; Obama weathered Rev. Jeremiah Wright. If you want to be president, you have to expect this sort of thing and handle it well as you keep your eye on the ball and win the election.
6
This boat seems awfully swift.
6
I wonder if the DNC has already declared Warren the wrong candidate for 2020. Maybe somebody else has put up some money again.
8
NY times, please don't publish these silly articles that make mountains out of a non-issue and thereby add nothing but negativity to the potential solid presidential candidate.
Senator Warren is fine woman and I will gladly vote for her if she stands.
Remember how you ran pages of negative coverage on the Clinton emails?? Look who we have now.
Please , do your bit to shore up democracy in this nation.
17
If she only left this whole mindless debacle alone. She just continues to add fuel to the meaningless fire of something that doesn’t matter to a majority of individuals. WHO CARES?! Move on, show us something that we can lean on during this dire time of our democracy!!!
2
Warren has more integrity in one DNA molecule than Trump has in his entire obese body.
Do Republicans think FOX News smear machine will work again now that people have seen Trump up close? Can they channel Roy Cohen?
8
Who cares???? Stop letting Donald Trump and allies control the narrative. I am a Republican defector, and I really want the dems to win, but c'mon people, stop it with the identity politics. Democrats need an inspirational candidate with a killer instinct. You will get votes like mine if you back the right person....The goal is to WIN
7
Just one more peril in framing everything by ethnicity and grievance group. I expect that the Democrats will learn nothing from this since that's really all they have to offer. That is *why* she was so intent on proving her status as a "minority".
4
Embracing identity politics liberalism at its worst, Warren's cheap trick is a discredit to her candidacy. But it is an understandable attempt to capitalize on a logic of identity and representation in response to oppression, exclusion, or marginalization. It is deeply embedded in American political life.
A DNA test is absurdity crowned: there is no biology of culture. The idea goes back to social darwinism, the invention of IQ (to justify the social inferiority of American blacks), and racial anti-Semitism, with consequences forever infamous. From this racial culturalism (attitudes about culture attributed to ethnicity or genetics), no good has come.
Peoples are affairs of history, not biology. Nature has no politics.
Warren should simply learn about Native Americans and ask what they want and need. A nation is a collectivity and so not an individual but a set. The president represents the nation, including everybody. A collectivity can have multiple identities. "E pluribus unum," "Out of many, one."
Representation is more than the appearance of bodies on a stage. It's at the level of ideas that politicians can do much for anyone. Politics is mostly about a "what," not a "who."
Perhaps only in this country today can a candidate expect that his or her race, gender, religion, etc. would be a sufficient condition for election to rule.
Not conservatives alone know this; the real left knows it; only our "liberals" do not.
1
Watching the Left eat itself is absolutely fascinating. It’s like a race to the bottom of the Identity Politics sewer. There is something in it that reminds me of the old Stalin movies where the workers are shown standing up and denouncing each other.
17
I find it funny how the commenters here twist into circles trying to be apologists for Elizabeth Warren. The DNA test said she probably was 1/64th to 1/1024th Native American.
The average white person has 0.18% Native American genetics. Warren had somewhere between 1.5-0.09% Native American genetics. So basically Warreb probably has the same amount or slightly more Native American genetics compared to the average white person.
So to say that her DNA test validates Warren as a Native American is to say that almost every white person has a valid claim to being Native American. I think even the most ardent liberal would have to admit that the facts dont support her assertion at Harvard that she is Native American. And saying it was just one form a long time ago is to say that it's fine to appropriate someone's culture as long as you only did it once a long time ago.
I'm sorry but just because Trump is bad doesnt mean I'm going to excuse Warren's flaws. Shes not only too far left to get elected, she also lied about her identity and then tried to assert that she has Native American ancestry through a DNA test when her family never was enrolled in a tribe and she never practiced Native American culture in her childhood. I dont think running a more liberal version of Hillary Clinton is enough to get my vote.
Shes a great Senator, she should continue to represent the people of Massachusetts.
10
Elizabeth Warren pulled a "Clinton" except worse.
Hillary Clinton should have handled her "Email Problem" in three days not nine months. Admit mistake. Apologize unequivocally.
Come completely clean.
Hillary did the opposite and "succeeded" in turning it into a nine month problem that cost her the election. She gave Trump a stick to beat her with. He did.
Elizabeth Warren has done a "Clinton" but worse and longer. When I see or hear her I don't really get past how badly (fatally)
she has handled her problem.
It goes right to "Authenticity." She doesn't have any.
9
If she hadn’t brought this issue up over and over again, no one would have cared. Instead she made a fool of herself and played right into her opponents’ hands.
So now, her emerging issues are called common sense and judgement.
13
This is ridiculous. Warren is part Native American. She looks the part, as do here brothers. She has a cousin in the Cherokee nation. I am only a small part Native American, but I talk about it, as is my right. She talks about it and is proud of her heritage, as is her right. No one can take that away, not the leader of a Native American people or the leader of the United States. People should accept her as she is, part Native American, and look at her political platform, not her DNA. End of story.
26
Trump bullies by saying, "You aren't." People respond by showing birth certificates, DNA results. Perfectly logical response.
I think the difference in mass reaction to providing said response is what attribution theory predicts: most attribute the "out-group person's" intent as malicious. Typical.
5
I see from a lot of the comments, that many other people feel the same outrage I do over this article; and the assumption in it that spokespeople speak for native people collectively, as a monolith, and that this is truly a deal-breaker, when the article itself admits there's no evidence that it's had any effect whatsoever on her poll numbers. The degree of criticism leveled at Warren is breathtaking; in the aftermath of the Salem Witch Trial of of Hillary Clinton (do , , any of you people remember her stunning, presidential performance at her public hearing/show trial on Benghazi?)
This self-immolation of the Left has gotten ridiculous.
We don't need Trump to destroy us; this isn't left vs. right, it's not the haves vs. the have-nots- it's the Left. . .against the Left . .
21
The Warren candidacy is dead. She is a fool to run, assuming she still does run. Other readers have well stated she could accomplish far more as a senator than a lame presidential candidate.
12
This isn’t news. This isn’t even a story. This was an issue created by the Republican Party to bring Warren down. Not including the context—she answered a questionnaire, and never received any advantage for her answer—is lazy and plays to ignorance.
15
That this is an issue is amazing. I thought once we elected a man who paid off strippers he slept with and who lies daily, that a mere exaggeration of Heritage would be quaint. Oh right, both sides do it.
14
i am no scientist or historian, but isnt there a difference between a DNA test, however flawed, and racist White supremacist notions of blood? We use DNA to exonerate falsely accused criminals. On the other hand, its in part due to racism that we see Obama as Black, and not half white. The one drop rule. Yes, DNA and me, and the other tests are not wholly accurate. But they are also not wholly innacurate. Is this argument not more academic than anything else? What should she apologize for?
13
I'm 1/1024 sorry that I ever doubted her.
11
This is crazy. Nearly 2,000 people commenting on the DNA of an implausible presidential candidate. Will there be another article devoted to the results of her ancestry.com report?
What exactly are her positions on the drug/alcohol and land issues which plague today's Native American reservations? Seems like this story just provides fodder to her opponents like the Kenyan descendancy theory did to Obama. Leave it alone already.
11
The competition for silliest, most irrelevant and most blown-out of proportion issue in an American presidential campaign is always stiff, but I think this one has a chance of winning.
Can we now take a break and discuss some issues that are actually important to the future of our country and its people?
14
Saying that Warren claims membership in the Cherokee Nation is a false narrative. Watch the video. The main point of it is to counter the original false narrative that she used Native American ancestry to gain minority status to help her get a job at Harvard. All lies.
13
She delivered CFPB, the best ever happened to US consumers, which is now being undermined by Trump surrogates. Racial superiority by DNA tests will only be in the minds of racists. Those racists will always support Trump. If she decides to run, she would be a formidable candidate against anyone out there. I would definitely vote for her, and she would be a great president.
14
This debate is kind of stupid. But it shows where this country is right now.
In my opinion she would make a perfect president. But I am not an American, so maybe the people who say she is unelectable are right? I don’t know.
But just watch the Wells Fargo hearing in Senate. What is wrong with this way of thinking? Why are not more ‘regular people’ like this. This is nothing against the American Way, but it is a way to stop corporate greed- which is the root cause for so many problems in this country. Why did so many companies go to China or Mexico to produce their product? Because the people that made this decisions got a ton of money - while communities and hard working people suffered. Not tariffs will bring jobs back- a new culture (and new ways in education) will bring jobs back!
Elisabeth Warren has the right ideas- but she maybe not lives in the right country.... too bad
7
Welcome to “But her emails!”, version 2020.
Will we ever learn? Apparently not.
20
Isn't lying about your identity to gain advantages the ultimate sin in identity politics?
7
Ugh. The worst person the Dems could put forward if they want to take control.
7
Hmmm. My DNA test shows I have Neanderthal ancestors. I wonder if I can get into Harvard Law as an extinct minority?
15
We do not need national Democratic leaders with such poor judgement regarding the handling of hate mongers. She needs to stand down.
5
She just blantly put it out there to stop the birth certificate-like distraction, turn the page and put this country on the right track. Enough of the bullying distraction. Wake up America.
4
Senator Warren has absolutely every right to have that test and put it out there, and I disagree with advisors who say she should apologize. We are living, every day, with a leader who lies and has belittled every one who has ever challenged or questioned him. Warren has demonstrated more moral courage and commitment to those she wants to serve then anyone in the current administration. Apologize for what?
10
She did the right thing and she is better than 90% of other Democrats. But if I have to choose between Sanders and Warren I will choose the former!
3
stop. Just stop. The issue here and now is addressing the future of America and its dependence on oil. Stay focused. Warren is willing to go to bat and play by the rules of fighting special interests.
8
And this whole brouhaha over an issue like this, is why the left and Democrats who try to appeal to them, don't end up winning national elections.
9
Who care if she is or isn't Native American. Even if it is a tiny exaggeration one way or another, what's the big deal. We have the most the definition of dishonesty and corruption who is immune to any consequences because he is a Republican.
Emails - why the persecution of Hillary yet nothing with Ivanka's abuse of her own personal e-mails which likely has e-mails from Jared that likely has top secret and compromising information.
The "bloviating ignoramus" (to quote George Will) misrepresents absolutely EVERYTHING without consequence. Why? Compared to trump, Senator Warren is virtually impeccable, a superior intellect and a far more decent human being.
16
Republicans hope she is the nominee. She has zero chance of winning against Trump or any other viable candidate. Once again, those who live on either coast plus Illinois can’t see the forest in the rest of the country.
2
Warren is not a viable candidate for President. Continue your good work in the Senate.
4
Get over it folks. She proved that she wasn’t lying about her lineage to someone that can rarely prove he isn’t lying about whatever . She isn’t looking for a share of anyone’s casino profits or exemption from sales tax. Embrace this intelligent, dedicated person at face value and think about how she wouldn’t have embarrassed herself or the indigenous Americans that gathered at the white house that day by an individual who couldn’t resist the urge to disparaged her at the cost of the solemnity of the event or the memory of Pocahontas, who was a real person, not a cartoon character.
There are many people/issues that negatively effect the proud peoples of this continent of all backgrounds, Ms Warren isn’t one them.
12
It would seem that there are covert undercurrents pushing this non-issue to be a recurring issue. A tempest in a teapot, as it were. Yet on the other side of the spectrum, transgressions big and small are ignored or spun using pretzel logic. A cynic might observe that the party with the lousiest candidates is making hay of every move by the opposition for the purpose of squashing that party’s more qualified up-and-comers before they can gain any traction. Instead of improving their own lot, they’re poisoning their competitors well.
6
Harvard says that Warren's ancestry did not factor in her hiring. But this is the same Harvard being sued for discrimination against Asians. The same Harvard that admitted to discriminating against Jews - too many good applicants.
What makes this so bad for Warren is that it's a mark on an otherwise unblemished record so it is all the more glaring. If Trump was accused of something as serious it would be discounted because it's Trump. Not fair but that is how it is.
All is moot because the country is not interested in Mass. / Northeast liberals. Ask former presidents Dukakis and Kerry.
Too bad because though I would never vote for Warren but she is attractive: nice looking, good speaker, personable etc...all of which is important for politics. I think a big part of Hillary's problem was she is so unappealing like fingernails on a chalkboard.
4
“... Ms. Barnes, a self-described liberal, [has made] something of a personal pledge: She will never vote for Ms. Warren under any circumstance, including in an election against Mr. Trump.”
Ms. Barnes is obviously no liberal. I don’t care how angry or hurt she is: thinking this is such a big deal that she’d be willing to see Donald Trump in the White House for a second term is short-sighted and obscenely self-centered.
12
Poor thing got herself into a load of trouble just by following the politically correct norms of her day and declaring that she was not a white woman.
For Harvard already had enough white women.
Maybe they needed a Native American to round out their faculty.
So she wrote an Indian cookbook, put herself in legal directories as Native, and never thought about it again.
Until her brilliant Senate opponent Scott Brown uncovered this deception while driving around Massachusetts in his old pickup truck.
And though this might be a signal to end advancement based on race, it's only likely to enhance it.
As more Americans see claiming one race or identity as helpful to a career.
And quickly forget about the challenges one faces when mistruths are discovered.
4
Not sure Warren is exactly leadership material. In 2016 she waited until after the Dem presidential primary in Massachusetts then endorsed the winner. She was too cowardly to endorse anyone before and campaign on their behalf.
4
While some of us are interested in taking a DNA test for a variety of reasons, what is most important is that Ms. Warren might stand by The Native American, and honor her promise to take up their plight and restore their pride.
3
It would interesting if Warren runs against Trump. Two academics going toe to toe--a former Harvard law school professor and the erstwhile president of Trump University. I wonder who has the better credentials.
8
@ZHR
That's funny! But Eureka College educated Ronald Reagan bested US Navel Academy educated Jimmy Carter, a nuclear engineer no less.
4
Sounds as if Ms Barnes simply does grasp the concept of the “lesser of two evils.”
She needs to grow up politically.
4
My family has been traced back to the original settlers in the New World and I like the idea but it makes no difference in Me. The person I am.
Meanwhile my mother had 2 sisters who married two brothers.
My fair skinned blue eyed family met the Norwegian and Alaskan Indian family.
So while I am a white mouse ,my uncle and his children are 4 little Indians.
And we all think we are all beautiful, not to mention Very Cool :)
3
Looks like Warren is getting the Bernie treatment; put her out there on the fringe, and make her unelectable. Let's see,
"For some Warren allies and progressive groups... profoundly poor judgement". Now was it really profoundly poor? Did any of her allies say "profoundly"? Which progressive groups said "profoundly"?
As best as I understand it, she claimed to have Native American heritage, and the dna test bears this out.
But lets give the times some credit. After 23 "paragraphs" of a negative spin on this, in paragraph 24 (give or take) they write,
"Those close to Ms. Warren also note they had several allies in the progressive and Native American communities who supported their decision from the outset."
Then the author of this piece concludes by quoting a Cherokee genealogist Twila Barnes, who was on the record as saying there was no evidence of Native American heritage in her genealogy, and now has made a pledge to not vote for her even against trump even if she apologized because "She's had six years to apologize".
With due respect to genealogists, a genealogist is to a geneticist almost like an astrologer is to an astrophysicist (emphasis on almost).
As far as I'm concerned, Elizabeth Warren is a highly qualified individual with the interest of the public foremost on her agenda, and if she runs, I will vote for her in the primary as well as the general should she make it there.
Good luck Senator Warren!
24
Senator Warren would make a fine President, but because she checked that box 30 years ago, it's now out of the question. It's not fair or right, but this has become too big of a problem and we need to move on.
7
@Frank Roseavelt: Trump and his anti- Democratic Republicans are a way bigger problem and that will remain the case if Democrats require their candidates to be saints. They should call Republicans’ bluff and hammer on policies that serve the 99%, not the 1%.
10
I support most of Warren’s policy positions. Her depth of knowledge on the issues makes her very effective in the Senate. That she “persists” against the likes of McConnell is good for the country. Sadly, I also find her off-putting and not a very smart S&T type of pol. Before the sexism brickbat hits me, I could easily support a more appealing candidate such as Amy Klobuchar or, had she been born in the USA, Jennifer Granholm. If the country is tired of Trumpist stridency, certainly won’t take it from a candidate of the left.
3
She didn't misrepresent herself. She has American Indian ancestry, just as she believed she did. And she definitely has my vote; even if it meant I'd have to register as a Democrat in order to vote for her in a primary (fortunately in Virginia I wouldn't have to do that). Hang in there for 2020, Elizabeth.
11
I'm a big fan of Senator Warren - she's capable and fierce and knows what she's talking about. That said, I honestly don't think she should run for President since she seems unlikely to win.
Sen. Warren makes a good cable news talking head, an able and un-bullyable foil for the no-facts, ma'am belligerence of Mr. Trump. But she doesn't seem to pass the "who would you enjoy having a beer with?" test -- she just seems too severe and humorless to appeal to middle America.
Similarly, I find many of the current "rock star" Democrats flawed for various reasons, not as legislators or public figures, but as national, Presidential candidates.
The one person who really turned my head recently was Senator Amy Klobuchar, whose self-assurance and calm demeanor during the Kavanaugh hearings revealed a heartland liberal who has massive mainstream appeal. Firm, but with a kind, friendly demeanor, Klobuchar projects Midwestern pragmatism and a can-do, problem solving attitude... Plus she is highly telegenic and seems like someone that many of already know, or would like to meet. If anyone can win in 2020, it's Amy Klobuchar.
9
@Joe S.
We should all make it clear we want Amy Klobuchar. She's the best the Democratic Party has. We'd be lucky to have her as our president!
6
@fast/furious
I am impressed with Senatoe Klobuchar. I think we can use the primary process to sort out, not attack, those interested in running.
Right now Sen. Klobuchar is my favorite....and maybe Warren, also a brilliant public servant, as AG.
3
Right or wrong..the reality is that this was a big mistake on her part. While it makes no difference to me..the fact is that it will make a difference to enough people that it will keep her from ever winning the Presidency.
It is so incredibly important that the Dems take the White House that she should bow out for the good of the Country, remain a Senator, and keep fighting for what is right.
7
Senator Warren made a mistake letting Trump decide the battle. Focus! Is it about governing or joining into the Trump noise?
6
Talk about double standards. Warren commits a gaffe about her heritage and is being written off as a presidential contender. Not that I'm a huge Warren supporter, but Trump lied about his source of wealth, derided war heroes, made sexist comments, coddled foreign adversaries, supported torture (I could go on) and the Republican voters ate it up and dismissed what was distasteful for the bigger prize. Not saying Democrats should also ignore significant character flaws, but come on. A little balance would be nice. All politicians have faults, even Democrats. Let's not forget Kennedy, Johnson, Carter, Clinton (again, I could go on).
Let's not cut off the proverbial nose to spite the face!
16
Elizabeth Warrens statements have become too political for people to see them objectively.
As the son of an immigrant family, who is neither supportive or against Warren (though I did see her speak), her comments are really racist. The fact that most Americans cant see this is indicative of a larger problem in the US - culture appropriation.
A lot blacks and whites in the US, simply identify as white or black. Culturally they aren’t tied to anything. Yet that’s not true for the rest of us. Native Americans don’t have strict rules on being Native American. Its like that almost everywhere. If you move to England, live there, adopt the culture, become a citizen you are English- regardless of where you came from. Its the same with Native Americans. You dont necessarily need NA blood, but they are more open to people who have NA ancestory.
So when Elizabeth Warren writes down she is NA for college, or to make a political statement, and affirms she is impart native American, she is disregarding the entire culture that actually has meaning. Which for some people means getting driven off their own land or the food they eat or the language they speak or the day to day activities they do. None of which Elizabeth Warren cares about.
3
@Jack: There is nothing in all I read about Elizabeth Warren that says she disregards Native American cultures (there are many different such cultures). On the contrary, I’d say.
4
Elizabeth do not run. If you think people hated Hillary people really dislike Elizabeth, even in Massachusetts. I voted for her but that’s only because the alternative was republican. There is no way she will be president.... please do not waste the Democratic ticket as such a polarizing figure.
8
Can someone please tell me why she has to stand there and take his racist name calling and bullying? She never claimed to be a tribe member and never asked for any tribal recognition. Trump threw down the gauntlet and she finally picked it up. Well good for Elizabeth Warren! I can’t fathom how somehow she is the “bad guy” in this. I’m proud of her for not taking his attacks lying down. And of course lost in all this is one more of Trump’s false promises of money to go to charity. Elizabeth Warren stood up for herself plain and simple, and brought no one down by doing so. In this era of #metoo and the rise in numerous racial attacks, too many people are on the wrong side of this.
10
But you forgot to mention that she fabricated a false identity and tried to perpetuate it. And failed miserably.
5
it is nothing, but the GOP making it into big thing, trying to harm her reputation because if she gains power,,,,,, she will tear them apart..
7
My only problem with Warren is that she did not endorse Bernie in 2016.
7
Genetic tests are available for everyone who is interested in their ancestry. Senator Warren had an absolute right to deal with the vile creature who is the president. If anyone needs to apologize it is this deceitful mendacious president.
hypocrisy of so called Native Americans to use this as a weapon against her is odd since they use genetics to determine who belongs in their tribe, race or whatever they wish to call it. First they are no more Native Americans than I or anyone else who was born here. Canada uses a much better term, First Nations, to describe those who were here before the coming of Europeans.
My grandchildren are a mix of many people who came here in the distant past from Asia, Europe and Africa. What difference does it make? It is the character of the person that counts and Senator Warren has proved herself to be that person who cares about this country and all its people.
8
I think we spend too much time on where our ancestors came from and not enough on who they were as persons.
I have an Irish surname but no provable Irish ancestors. When I visited Ireland I was called a Yank.
I have provable English and German ancestors. But if I visit England or Germany I am called a Yank or ein Amerikaner.
Calling ourselves Americans is a bit presumptuous considering America is two continents. But until we can think of some better name than Usans, American will have to do.
4
Yes, of course. Go after the strong female politician. Cut her off at the knees and do everything possible to render her ineffective. It’s the Republican playbook and the public is playing right into their hands.
21
Exactly! Thank you!
2
@Kat The public are the voters. They decide. If the Dems can find a female candidate that excites the voters such as Obama – then fabulous. Unfortunately this particular female politician will drive many crazy and do the opposite despite being capable and smart. Winning a Presidential election requires a complicated chemistry of voter acceptance and a feeling for the moment. Senator Warren should continue her good work in the Senate.
1
Trump mocked Warren's family story that they had some Indian heritage. She called his bluff by taking a DNA test that showed that, in fact, she had some Indian heritage. End of story, right?
Apparently not. She is accused, by among others the Cherokee tribal government, that her actions "gave validity to the idea that race is determined by blood."
Really? Perhaps the Cherokee tribal government needs to reconsider its argument before the Supreme Court in Adoptive Couple v. Baby Girl, 570 U.S. ___ (2013) that the "one drop" standard gave the Tribe jurisdiction over an adoption proceeding. And perhaps those who believed that Rachel Dolezal (who had Black siblings, a Black husband, Black children, who attended a historically Black university and dedicated herself to Black social and political causes) should be taken out and shot for identifying as Black should also reconsidertheir outrage. But it probably will not happen. the left eats it own.
13
Let’s just leave this alone. It is so unimportant.
16
I’m sorry, but I respectfully disagree. It is very important. Trump gets to attack whomever he wants, call them names on the national stage; and nobody gets to respond? All Elizabeth Warren did was call his bluff. Good for her. This is most important. Not enough people stand up to him and his bullying. He is the president and should not treat anyone this way.
11
This is right up there with Howad Dean's prairiedog shrill. It just cost her the nomination.
9
This is beyond silly. It does however show the telling double-standard in politics and the high bar that exists for Democrats and the gutter-level low bar for Republicans. Trump is Teflon when it comes to his childish taunts and demeaning "Pocahontas" references, where were the Native American groups then???? But when a Democrat simply wishes to hit the problem head-on and be done with it - controversy. If I was Elizabeth I would address it by expressing profound disappointment in the electorate for allowing themselves to believe this is anything other than Republican-like...child play.
17
It was the historian Edward Gibbon who back in 1776 wrote “The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire.” In this book he worked to explain the mystery of how such a once-mighty empire could just shrink away.
If years from somebody writes a similar history of how our American empire declined, I’m sure they will pinpoint a key event as the election of 2020, when the evil Donald Trump was able to gain another four year term. And so among other things his reverse-gear approach to climate change put the planet on a more firm pathway to becoming a cinder.
How could this have happened? Well, one cause was that good people who were in a great position to stop this instead became consumed with the kind of ridiculous stuff like that in this article. So instead of taking command they fiddled while American burned, figuratively and literally (see “Camp Fire").
Hey guys, if Liz Warren isn’t quite pure enough for you, well, sorry, but if you’re waiting for a presidential candidate to meet your high standards you’re going to be waiting a long time. And in the meantime our once-great country goes down the tubes. Hey, maybe I can write that book – “The Trip Down the Tubes of the American Empire!”
15
Come off it.
We all have family lore and legends.
America is a melting pot.
If your family was here for enough generations, it’s not unusual to have some family who were native Americans.
Sophisticated genetic tests might show this, 23andMe likely not.
Give it a break.
Most Americans have various backgrounds: and that’s a good thing.
8
While your statement is correct, it misses the point of the whole argument. Why is Elizabeth Warren supposed to stand still for Trump’s bullying and Pocahontas comments? She stood up to him. Somehow now she is the problem? And what about his additional baseless promise of $1 million to charity? We are supposed to allow our president to speak to people that way and just lie on and on and on. Finally somebody called him on it.
10
@Doug
Hi Doug, my comments were intended to encourage us to shift away from identity politics, which Trump and his ilk will always weaponize.
We’re not going to beat Trump at any of his games.
We just have to stress our own narratives, values, vision - and speak louder.
Offense, not defense.
And Obama came out with his birth certificate and then the long form when Trump said he was born in Kenya. That was probably a mistake, too. But Trump eventually confessed that he was no longer a "birther."
Remember that Trump actually challenged Warren to take a DNA test, and said he would give a million dollars to her favorite charity if it were positive, which it is. No million dollars, but I haven't heard about any Pocohontas tweets lately.
It is not only Warren and Obama, but all of us, and especially the MSM and NYT who should stop responding to Trump's rude bullying tweets. I would like to see the Times stop running long articles about Trump's tweets and their effects, and just run a daily bottom of the page list of today's tweets and ridiculous statements, with the briefest of commentary. I believe that if you and other MSM had done this in 2016, he would have lost. Instead, you gave him the attention he craves and thrives on. Four Trump articles (all in the lead news column) to one Hillary article, and zero Bernie articles.
This is sick, and why we have Trump.
Please stop. This is not news. Warren, like Clinton and Sanders, deserves to run on her policies and values.
15
Sen. Warren made a mistake many years ago when she claimed to be Native American on an application.
She had two reasonable options for dealing with this very minor transgression. Acknowledge the mistake or simply ignore it.
Instead she chose Option 3: Remind and inform people of the original mistake, pretending that it wasn’t a mistake.
I’m a Trump supporter, but I rather like Sen. Warren. I think she has important ideas worthy of national debate.
Oh well, it doesn’t matter now. She is toast, after willingly jumping directly into the toaster.
7
This is a tempest in a tiny teapot, manufactured by the right-wing and aided and abetted by the mainstream media including this august newspaper that should know better but never seems to catch on. The news here is the same as it has been throughout Trump's term of office and for years prior - when corrupt politicians have no real substance to offer average Americans, they turn to ad hominen attacks on their foes. I want to see stories that focus on cravenness of such people attacks in the face of tremendous challenges facing us -- climate change, further loss of jobs and pay for working people due to robotics, erosion of democratic values and regular order, criminal behavior by large banks, big Pharma and other large corporations, and direct attacks on the status of women and minorities -- rather than on a relatively minor misstep by an energetic, honest elected official in response to one of these baseless attacks.
9
I don't really care what she is trying to prove. What she has established is that she gamed the system by playing a minority card that she really wasn't entitled to.
Affirmative action is already a hot button issue. For many people, particularly those in Trump's base, it's already irritating when those actually entitled to the preference claim it. But it must be absolutely infuriating when someone as privileged as Senator Warren claims it on such dubious grounds.
It no longer matters what Senator Warren says, stands for, or does. This is now a tattoo that she will have to wear for the rest of her political life.
Game over.
9
@Douglas Evans: It is well established that Senator Warren never claimed or received any preferences based on her Native American ancestry.
4
I rolled my eyes when I read how Warren has received criticism from the far left. I've received my share of tongue lashings from this end of the political spectrum as well. Not politically correct enough for them. I'm glad Warren found out the truth after all these years. She was curious about her family story and now she can be proud of her Native American ancestry, slight as it is. Can we now move onto more important matters, such as the kind of person Warren is, her accomplishments in life, and what she can do for our country?
19
Classic democrats (And I say this as one). Like Al Franken, we are going to take down a phenomenal candidate for an issue THAT HAS NO BEARING ON HER ABILITY TO BE A POLITICIAN. Republicans can become President while still saying “grab them by the...” but Democrats slay our own for nada.
20
After spending my life thinking I was 100 percent from a southern European country, I was surprised and delighted to find out from DNA testing that I have ancestors that came from three different continents in the last 300 years. Am I to deny this discovery to appease those who consider it not legitimate because I was not brought up with that identity? Nonsense! I embrace the wonders of my past and my part as an ancestor of someone in the future.
12
Worries about what? Folks need to quit allowing their ignorance to focus on issues that have no impact on anything that she would do if elected president.
Trump has a whole train load of bad issues and the Pubs ignore every one of them; why change their plans now?
It appears the DNA test actually supports her, after all she never claimed to be a major member of any tribe.
6
I wonder why this is even the remotest of an issue. DNA ancestry tests are even advertised as offering surprises, so finding you are or not as much or at all of the ethnic origin our parents or grandparents told should not be a surprise.
My 23andme.com result showed a small percent of Korean while all I ever knew was which county in Ireland my folks came from.
Just enjoy it all people! Why the fuss?
6
This harkens back to the time when a candidate for President could only make one mistake and they would be out of running a few days later.
Trump rewrote that rule book and so far it only applies to him.
7
This article magnifies the objections to Warren's DNA test based on pot shots from minor players and dubious analysis. Her constituents just re-elected her with over 60% support so the electorate seems unaffected by this situation. The Boston Globe article on her academic career makes it clear beyond any reasonable dispute that her ethnicity, without or without any Native American background, played absolutely no role in her professional success.
She remains one of the very few Democratic politicians geunuinely committed to economic justice. I think this is heat generated by the right, which findes economic justice deeply threatening. It has little or nothing to do with her real support among actual Democrats.
14
Years from now, when we tell children why we failed them on so many critical issues of the day (e.g. climate change, healthcare, economic inequality and more), I hope we will have the courage to admit that we spent most of our time discussing this kind of nonsense (Elizabeth Warren's family background?!).
It's hard to fathom this is even a news story. Ms. Warren is eminently more qualified to be President than our current one. The fact that this "issue" could hurt her somehow in light of everything that has been said and done by President Trump makes no sense.
Eventually, the years of pushing educated, smart leaders like Ms. Warren to the margins while celebrating "charismatic" leaders like President Trump will hit home. Just give it another 20-30 years or so.
20
Please Sen Warren, don't run for the presidency. I can see the ads and your loss already. The dems need someone that can actually win.
10
@Paulie: If Senator Warren’s political record isn’t good enough for the purists, the Democrats do not have, and will never have, someone who can actually win. They might as well concede to the Republicans now and be done with it. There will be attack ads against any candidate the Democrats come up with, and if there’s nothing to attack, the Republicans will make something up. Remember John Kerry’s swiftboating? The birther lie against Obama? Should they have withdrawn their candidacy because the Republicans said “boo”? At least Obama won twice nonetheles...
6
Besides telling us something about our personal history, DNA testing offers us a collective lesson in how much diversity we share and how closely related we might be. All of the tribalism, feudalism, racism.... all of the petty disputes between different groups, different religious sects... All of the blood spilled, all of the hatred, the wars, the senseless loss of life and of human dignity. The world is full of bitter disputes of the past few hundred years. But DNA shows us something deeper! That we might be more a part of some group we've been taught to despise, than we ever imagined. Taking or not taking a DNA test does not change this history. It merely sheds some faint light on it. We should all take pride in the diversity of our ancestry... it is the very fabric of our human society.
9
Some Progressives are so lacking in political common sense sometimes, that it's embarrassing to be one.
13
So when did the Democrats start believing that no-nonsense-no smile-no silliness, serious minded people should be the face of the Party ? To get elected as a democratic party nominee for president, you have to be able to show smile, warmth, silly, serious, compassion, toughness and guile. In short, you've got to be . . .
5
Complaining about Senator Warren taking a DNA test is ridiculous. She just did what thousands of other people have done: took a DNA test to see if her family stories could be substantiated.
12
As long as she shares her tax returns, I don't care about her DNA test.
13
So she's digging her heels in. Smart! And classy.
5
A big to do about nothing. Overanalyzed to the point of silliness. Please, focus on real issues. There are certainly plenty.
9
Warren is a woman who tells the truth; Donald lies; cheats and steals. No contest. Ray Sipe
9
I feel grateful to be a Human Being.
Since you journalists no longer have Hillary's emails to discuss, this is the next big topic? I fear that the media hasn't learned its lesson going into 2020, and you are going to help Trump get reelected.
Don't do this to the America people. I beg you.
4
It seems odd to me that Native American leaders are so ready to criticize a white politician who claims she feels a connection with them. This smacks of "Whatever whites do is never good enough for us!" Why not support her feeling of a connection to benefit their Native American members?
14
I have seen and heard all I want to see and hear from this woman. She has a very unpleasant edge to her personality that is off putting and the fact that she has made these ridiculous claims about her heritage speaks to her lack of judgment. No thank you.
10
This woman only wants to be in the spot light. She is a poor excuse for a representative
8
I respect Senator Warren. She's a great senator.
But the DNA test and announcing it during the run-up to the midterm election was incredibly flawed. First, any distraction from the midterm election issues was a dumb, selfish thing to do. This shows that Warren is either politically inept or unconcerned with others if her ambition is at stake.
Secondly, this action was Warren playing on Trump's playing field, where he decides the topics of discussion and makes the rules. She got the DNA test done to prove to Donald Trump that she "is who she says she is." Think about what an incredibly weak thing that was to do to try to shut Donald Trump up. Not to mention it would never work.
We now have evidence that she has very amateurish political chops and Trump now knows that she's weak and will react to him trolling her - sometimes by doing something where she messes herself up. Thus, any campaign between Warren and Trump is going to be a marathon of Trump trolling, mocking, humiliating and fabricating things about Warren to keep her knocked off balance all the time and try to exhaust her with making her defend herself. By taking the test, she proved Trump had knocked her off balance.
Don't think he won't do it again. A thousand times.
Warren's not politically astute enough to know how to deal with Donald Trump. That makes her the last person who should be the Democratic nominee.
Donald Trump will eat Senator Warren alive.
7
Perhaps Native Americans would like to throw their support to all those Republicans that have treated them so well through the years.
11
Please, Ms Warren, et al., let us leave this increasingly ridiculous topic behind us... put it to bed. And let's not be tempted to respond to moronic and insulting comments on this by the current and we hope soon-to-be-indicted occupant of the WH. Trading barbs and tweets with him is like doing you-know-what into a head wind. It wastes time and effort and sullies us.
Please, let's find valuable, weighty topics for our political representatives to discuss.
5
So when are we going to see Trump’s tax returns?
8
Elizabeth Warren is not a good candidate for the presidency.
.
That would be true whether she had only first nations ancestors, or none at all.
.
The danger here is the Hillary issue: Someone who so badly wants to be president that they are unable to see that the world will continue to turn whether they are elected or not.
.
Just because you want to be president, doesn't make you a good presidential candidate.
.
Accept that truth, and bow out gracefully.
.
Do not, for the sake of your own ego, subject the public to two years of Pocahontas taunting, that results in another four years of calamity at the White House.
.
Accept the truth that you are not a suitable candidate, put your country ahead of yourself, and bow out gracefully.
5
The problem with Warren's DNA results is that they are the truth. And for some reason in the ERA OF TRUMP, truth is no longer important. This is another DARK MONEY TACTIC.
This whole thing is disturbing to American "Indians", because if we did DNA studies on Native Americans you would find that many do not qualify for living on reservations. Their culture is caput, because they have been intermarrying with non-Indians. My Grandfather was a half-breed; therefore, my father was a quarter breed, and did not qualify for Indian "benefits'. That makes me an 1/8th breed, and my kids are 1/16th breeds. Get your own DNA tested, and you may find out that you are derived from cultures that you ancestors wanted to hide from your family history.
4
And..... the progressives eat their young for lunch... why this movement will not last.. might have some gains. but every progressive is so stuck on their beliefs that a fault of another becomes a large chain around their neck
6
Everyone has a right to their own history. To acknowledge their grandparents and great grandparents going as far back as they want to go. No one, no tribe, no country, no government, should be allowed to take that from them, to try to deny them a history.
Sen Warren does not claim membership in a tribe, she claims descent from a person. A person whose life helps inform the woman that Sen Warren feels she is.
She has been told she is lying about her own history from President Trump, She has been told by a Cherokee leader that the history of her family doesn't count for anything, when it does to Sen Warren. It isn't the blood of their tribe that matters to her, contrary to the Cherokee who wish to deny her her history,it is the blood of her family. The blood that runs through her veins.
Now the New York Times wants to say that her own family history is not something she should talk about, not something she can claim. That she can't use anecdotal family stories, and she can't use science. The vaunted times has no use for facts when they want a woman to vanish.
And let no doubt, that this is what Mr Herndon is putting across here. He is trying to vanish a woman. I doubt he would be so happy if his own history, his own culture, his own history should vanish. But then that is the nature of the business he works for.
Shame him and his paper.
10
Why, one wonders, would she contort herself to be even less of a minority? We, as a nation, should be judged on ability. Harvard should pay attention.
3
I don’t get this at all. The Republicans acted like she lied about something when she didn’t. She released the results of a DNA test proving that she didn’t lie. So why hasn’t the result been embarrassment and criticism for the Republicans who claimed she didn’t have Native American ancestry?
5
@L
99.9% European DNA means that you are not in any way, shape, nor form a Cherokee.
1
The sad thing is that if Warren had simply put out a statement that she did the DNA test to show transparency, was legitimately surprised by the results, admitted that she mistakenly believed family lore, and was proud to have thought she was actually part native American, I don't think any sensible person could've held that against her. It would just be considered an honest mistake.
But to count on non-objective news sources to gaslight the public that her 99.9% European DNA someone vindicated her claims to being part Cherokee was an insult to people's intelligence, and showed, on her part, that she was willing to go full Orwellian on an issue that shouldn't have really mattered that much, unless she somehow knew all along that she was lying about her Native American (non-)heritage.
Bear in mind, this woman died her hair jet black when she taught at Harvard. That was an unusual thing for a natural blond to do back in the '80s. She also plagiarized a cookbook, apparently, as part of her fake heritage as well. Not horribly evil unto itself, but the multiple events leave a really bad impression on people that she's a fraud.
8
It is hard to believe that taking a DNA test to learn one's ancestry is worthy of this level of condemnation. Ancestry.com hawks their products as Christmas gifts, so how can taking one be so questionable, let alone negative? Senator Warren could have handled this differently, but honestly I think a mountain is being made out of a molehill. I do think she underestimated the value in trying to out maneuver Trump - it's a fools game to fight an unabashed liar and bully by trying to one up him.
Criticism of her has been extreme in my opinion, but I also understand our country's long and deep history of mistreatment of Native Americans and other people of color, so I want to acknowledge and validate any discomfort or anger that other Americans may feel about her action. She can do more to redress the issue by putting the social and economic justice needs of Native Americans and other marginalized communities front and center in her potential campaign. Democrats (and their constituencies) need to stop shooting themselves in the foot while searching for the elusive candidate who is 100% pure and untarnished by any gaffes. We elect a human to be president, and humans do make mistakes.
3
I respect Warren, and I get why she did the test. However, I'm tired of this and all the other old debates, and think that we need some new blood in the Democratic party. Warren, Biden, and especially HRC, need to make way. I'm sure whoever does step up will be faced with ridicule over something, but I am so tired of the old arguments ... ready for something new.
2
At the US dinner table at night, post WWII, and right through into the 60's and 70's, in particular, it was quite common to count Native American ancestry with pride, with a sense of connection to an honorable ancient America. Conservation movements, a number of historians have noted, can often arise in real appreciation of preceding culture after conflict ends.
Native American ancestry came to mean connection in a vital, almost physical way with the land, and with the past.
If you don't think this is significant, early in our country's history, we placed a Freedom Statue, in Native American dress, on the Capital Dome.
One would call that an important site.
This was our way of countering the European claim to antiquity and aristocratic line.
So Elizabeth Warren grew up in a typical boomer family, around a table where ancestry lore gets stretched to credulity's absolute limit... and beyond. Heh. Who wants to belong to a shiftless family? In mine we were direct descendants of Pocohantus. I kid you not. The name Trump uses on Warren. It's actually a sad story. But we were also lateral descendants of Robert Burns. Neither of these are provable, but Liz wanted to take a test, you see, that might prove why she did that dumb thing back in the hippie days where we all wanted to be 'back to earth' Indians, eco-warriors and spiritual peyote journeyers....and I kid you not, millenials, but I'd bet that's how all this improbable sinking of a candidate came about.
1
"At the US dinner table at night, post WWII, and right through into the 60's and 70's, in particular, it was quite common to count Native American ancestry with pride, with a sense of connection to an honorable ancient America."
The problem is that Native people are more than just the museum of our imagined romantic American past. Native Americans are people with a future, not just a past. Their issues in the present-day world are not adressed by this romantic fantasizing about Native blood and ancient America. People can feel all romantic about their imagined ancestry and still make decisions that harm Native communities in the present.
2
Our society is still not comfortable with women being in power.
It's why it demands perfection from them, which of course is impossible.
So when a woman like Warren makes a mistake, it's made into such a huge deal and provides the excuse why they "can't" do the job.
Even if she made a mistake, would she be a better president than trump? Even if she lied would she be a better president than trump?
That's the question we should ask in an election, but it won't be. Instead it will be, is she perfect? No? Then I'm staying home/voting 3rd party etc.
This is Hilary's emails all over again. This is why trump is president.
4
OK--So after all of Trump's and the Republicans' lies, dissembling, and election fraud and cheating (North Carolina, Wisconsin, Michigan) we are going to pillory Elizabeth Warren for a claim of Native-American ancestry? Native Americans are expressing their dismay and hurt over this innocuous bit of exaggeration, as the Republicans are whittling away their lands and rights and Trump belittles their ancestors and traditions? Come on, get your priorities straight. I'm afraid we will be hearing more about this than the indictments coming from the Mueller investigation. Let's focus on the REAL CRIMES committed by Republican politicians and not the minor gaffes of Elizabeth Warren.
5
I simply don't think Warren can beat Trump, so I hope this does torpedo her chances for the nomination. And I'm a hypocrite (because I want Sanders to be the nominee), but overall I really tired of Warren's generation (the one immediately older than mine). Whether its the Clintons or Pelosi or those white male republican fossils on the Senate Judiciary committee, I'm really tired of the lot. Its ironic that 30 years ago that generation swept into the White House with the dynamic (very young for the jobs) Clinton and Gore, but rather than signaling an end to the hegemony of the geriatric, this generation kept and seems to never want to relinquish power or foster a new generation of leaders behind them. And they all seem to feel its vital that they keep their positions of power, even though I don't feel they led us anywhere in the last 30 years overall (advances in smart phones and in levels of tolerance for diversity in some areas have nothing to do with government policies and we've regressed in every other way). Apropos that their generation of rock stars proclaimed "hope I die before I get old" and now continue to make far, far more money than any younger acts by getting wheeled on stage at an older age than most anybody lived to back when they sang those words. Not that Warren is to blame, but just venting that we're stuck in a time loop of the same personalized ego battles of the 60s generation's two sides of that decade's culture wars. Give me Rubio v. Gabbard!
2
I live in MA and have voted and respect Ms. Warren. But she is not presidential material. Right now The Boss seems right, there isn't any Democrat out there right now who appears able to beat Trump.
5
It would be a very courageous move for her to run. She has opened herself up to relentless criticism and has a limited set of arguments or achievements on her side. She will be compared to Hilary Clinton and may only do well on the coasts and among the very progressive. The last election has shown that there are plenty of new candidates with less baggage to choose from, especially if the country wants to move to a new generation of politicians.
14
@Decville Elizabeth Warren has a "limited set of achievements on her side"? What kind of achievements do require in a candidate? She has had several successful positions in academia, and she's a U.S. senator. Can I ask what achievements you have? This statement wreaks of misogyny - would you say the same thing about a man with the same amount of experience?
6
@JS27
Her successes were based on a lie and those lies enabled her to get a platform from which to become well known. The non nomination to CFBP by Obama was her ticket to office in MA.
She is nothing more than a lucky liar who won a senate seat in a deep blue state where she had no real opposition for the nomination and the nomination normally equals a win especially on Obama’s coattails
12
This was clearly a very ill informed idea on the part of Senator Warren, but what should stand out to anyone reading this article is that what she did seems less controversial in comparison to the sorts of things Trump does repeatedly (e.g., his recorded conversation on the bus, his statements about the Charlottesville protestors, etc.). Yet, this probably means the end of Warren's white house bid. Why is that America lets Trump behave this way but not Democrats (and, it's not just Warren-remember Al Franken?)?
1
Donald Trump campaigns (because he is always in campaign mode) against illegal immigrants, and yet they work in his hotels. He campaigns for American jobs, and yet his and his family's merchandise is made abroad. He campaigned to drain the swamp, and yet he holds onto his businesses, welcomes international interests to his hotels, refuses to release his taxes that would show other conflicts, and surrounds himself with an administration that is the opposite of draining the swamp. But, sure. Let's look at Senator Warren's pride in being part native American culturally, which was clumsy but only built into a big deal by the press. Get some perspective, please.
1
We all have come across people who boast a familial connection to the Mayflower. I'm not quite sure what to make of these type of declarations but I give these people leeway regardless. Nevertheless, if my math is correct Elizabeth Warren, even accepting the most remote limit of her genetic identity, is about two generations closer to her Native American roots than those who claim themselves a Mayflower descendant. As a biologist I know that genetic ancestry is not equivalent to cultural identity and it is a mistake to confuse the two.
3
So, once again ...
There's nothing a woman can do right, and there's nothing a man can't do, right?
9
@Harry R. Sohl
This is absurdly self-indulgent.
I thought good Democrats believe there's no such thing as "race." So why is this good Democrat all caught up in trying to prove her "race"?
7
Because the President called her a liar. The test showed she almost certainly has the amount of Native American heritage she claimed. It’s that simple.
He slandered her, and she chose not to accept his attack, but to fight.
3
@Eric Westby But how could she possibly prove her "race" if there's no such thing?
1
Such pettiness which is typical of American politics. Senator Warren getting a DNA test to find out her heritage is not newsworthy beyond her proven what she stated: that she has some American Indian descent.
7
Lost in all of this is the fact that Trump dissembled for the longest time about his ancestry being Swedish when he knew darn well that it was German.
There is a great difference between what Senator Warren has done regarding genetic testing and what Trump has done.
This matter of having different yardsticks for different people is maddening. The New York Times is my usual go-to for responsible journalism, but it has badly stumbled regarding this matter.
7
When will the world get past race/ethnicity as having any meaning? We are all homo sapiens and race has no real value—it is sadly used to foment anger by people in power.
Just remember MLK's words.
1
Please don’t run, Senator. The Dems need new faces, new ideas, and new blood to win in 2020.
6
DNA testing to determine "racial affiliation"?
Extremely offensive to common sense and of course racial minorities.
1
Elizabeth Warren is a joke. She did play right into Trump's hands. Who care's if she's a native American or not. This is America. Elizabeth Warren should run on her own merits and not try to trade on her "heritage."
Especially if she's trying to get the votes of the white American Males who hear this all the time.
My philosophy is that if Elizabeth Warren was serious about running for President she'd run on the issues.
Why do you think Trump won? People are sick and tired of this reverse discrimination.
11
Trump is a brilliant debater and orator: the language is simple to the point of being oafish, but his arguments are memorable, slippery, and deceitful in their qualifications, misdirections and evasions. Unfortunately, Warren dignified his nonsense by taking the DNA test, instead of ignoring it, and so has laid herself open to further ridicule from him. She will have to change her tactics to get the better of him: don't the Dems have any rhetoricians and debate coaches to help her gut fight him?
4
Wow, a couple of years ago, a white woman tried to "pass" as black just bcs she felt affinity for African Americans. She was pilloried by liberals and minorities bcs you can't just "decide" to be a different race simply bcs you identify. Now Warren gets pilloried by the same groups because she is "perpetuating the dangerous White Supremacist notion" that race is genetically based. What exactly is it based on? It sounds to me like liberals are saying it is based on other people's perception of you -- if other people perceive you as a minority and then oppress you, you're that race. If they perceive you as white and don't oppress you, you're not that race. This seems pretty disempowering since it precludes self-definition.
8
@Kate S., well, according to this article you can have it both ways. You can simply decide to be any race or tribe you want to be--unless you decide you want to be in my race or tribe, and I arbitrarily decide you're somehow not entitled to this, so then I can trash you. What chutzpah!
In the "big picture" grand "scheme" of things who cares!
At most this ought to be a minor "issue". Of course any perceived flaw of a critic or opponent is 'game on' in a criticizing lie fest from the biggest FLAWED president in US history... Donald Trump.
Let US count the ways: racist, corrupt, self dealing, tax cheating, draft dodging, obese, tiny handed, balding comb over specialist, LYING LIAR (well over 6,000 since Jan. 2017), severely limited 'intellect' (read and listen to what and how he says things... a very small vocabulary... says/tweets the same lies and stupid things over and over and over).
Trump damaged our relations with bona fide US allies and makes excuses for corrupt despots like Putin, MBS, Duarte, et al.
Republican leaders lie and cheat time after time. Party over Country.
Since republicans can't win elections that are fair and square they continue gaming the system (as they have been doing for decades): voter suppression, extreme gerrymandering, trying to void elections (see what Wisconsin republicans are trying to do to hamstring they newly elected democratic governor; same as republican Georgia legislators pulled after the last election). Add in Brian kemp who won largely due to voter suppression and taking well over a million minority voters OFF voting rolls (a missing hyphen in a name was why for one example). Florida voter suppression and yet another badly designed ballot.
Then there's McCONnell... 2 words: Merrick Garland.
1
But what about Hillary's emails?
Didn't the Senator give a foreign policy speech last week?
Just kidding. Do we have polling on whether or not people want to have a beer with her?
What's her favorite cookie recipe?
Not that much time until the election. The Times has a lot of questions to answer.
1
I couldn't care less about her DNA. It's her out-of-touch fealty to socialist doctrine that disqualifies her as the head of a republic.
5
You mean advocating for just wages, clean financial markets, and healthcare is socialist? That's a pretty strange definition.
5
It would make more sense for Trump to call her “fake” instead of slurring the name of an Indian princess who was a hero.
3
I agree with you. Except for the “Princess” part. Anyone who tells you they’re (descended from) an Indian Princess is an obvious fraud.
The bottom line is that if she wins the Democratic Nomination the whole issue if her taking the DNA test to "prove" her ancestry will have little impact on her chances. But caving to Trump's pressure weakens her with the liberal contingent she needs to win the nomination. So a strong challenger like Beto or Kamala could benefit from this misstep.
Her problem is that she lied - first to Harvard, then to the public. And now she’s just digging herself a deeper hole. As a person of color - really, not just 1/1024th - the entire episode is beyond offensive. I would never vote for her because I would never trust her. She seems like a complete facade.
10
Actually one can see her native-American features in her face.
I like all her views except her criticism of Russia and China.
2
A woman cannot possibly run against Trump and win, DNA or not. Democrats need to realize that and put a man there.
4
Sigh...I thought the DNA thing was a great idea of how to kill off this whole thing once and for all. Who would have thought she would have generated all this angst?
Our evil President and his pals are ruining our once-great country, but are we concentrating our energy on how to oust them? Nope, instead we’re falling all over each other competing to see who can be most outraged and/or offended. So way to go guys—you’re doing a marvelous job of killing off the one potential presidential candidate who understood how Trump used his appeal to the disaffected middle class to eke out his narrow win in 2016, and how we could prevent a repeat in 2020.
But that’s OK, let’s celebrate our wonderful tribalism and diversity, while we let these evil-doers finish trashing our once-wonderful country, not to mention turning our planet into a cinder.
Sorry Senator Warren, at least you tried, but I guess we didn’t deserve you.
6
This is a huge issue for Ms. Warren if she intends to run for president. Despite NYT commenters claim to the contrary, and despite their pretending they don't understand what all the fuss is about, this is about lying, and lying about race, for personal gain. In May 2012, ABC News, one of your own, stated "After weeks of controversy, Massachusetts Democratic Senate candidate Elizabeth Warren said on Wednesday night that she did indeed tell the University of Pennsylvania and Harvard University that she was Native American...Warren had previously said that she did not know Harvard had touted her as such".
Ms. Warren has lied about this again, and again, so to come clean now would be to acknowledge all the past lying. This puts the democrats and media swooners in a difficult position. They accuse Republicans of lying at every possble turn, and accuse racial wrongdoing on every issue imaginable (at least until they die, at which point they become paragons of what republicans should be). Is some lying, and some race fudging okay? Use the best litmus test: what would your reaction be if she were an old, white, republican male.
7
It's basic playground common sense: Don't take the bait from a bully. And don't set yourself up to be baited in the first place by making over-reaching claims.
That said, this is a non-issue for me. It's a distraction -- another distrtraction from a man who uses distraction as currency -- and we shouldn't fall for it.
4
I really like Senator Warren and think she's probably one of the most intelligent people in Washington. I think she genuinely cares about the American people, which is a rare commodity in Congress these days, but I'm afraid she fell right smack into the trap that Trump set. She should have just ignored all of it instead of drawing more attention to it. It would have fallen away on its own. She should have been above the reality show games that Trump plays with people.
1
What trap? She lied and was called out on it. She created her own mess.
3
As a progressive voter I was shocked and disappointed that Senator Warren fell for the Trump bait and stooped to his level by taking a DNA test. She should have known from that get go that no matter what the test showed, he would continue to taunt her because facts to this bully do not matter in the least. But I am equally disappointed in my fellow progressives who, like the self-professed liberal Native American genealogist in this story, could never see themselves voting for Warren even against Trump. Well then, they better get used to six more years of this demagogue if that’s the way they feel. I hope the political fratricide is worth it to them.
4
I am a supporter of Elizabeth Warren. I believe that she is person of integrity and her positions on many issues are aligned with my own. It is a shame that she is being smeared in this way but not surprising given the politics of hate and division espoused by the current administration. I am sure that she did not intend to insult Native Americans in exploring her ancestry. I am sure, however, that President Trump was not being respectful of Native American heritage or Senator Warren when he ridiculed her by calling her “Pocahontas” and questioned her claims of heritage. She simply proved her claim, she does have Native American ancestors. Trump is, as usual, proved to be wrong on this issue just as he has been on scores of others. Good for her! The intent of her actions are important to me...not the optics. I hope she does run in 2020. She would make a great President. Certainly better than the dissembling, lying buffoon we are saddled with now.
4
I don’t want her to run. Her and Biden should focus on mentoring and supporting new, younger talent. The Democrats will never win with her on the ticket. It’s hard to understand how she can’t even see that herself?
2
It is puzzling how a Harvard Law professor could demonstrate such little common sense. As only he can do, Trump turned a minor matter into a monumental issue. The entire situation is absurd. Yet she couldn't figure a way to get out of it. Had she simply checked with a few ordinary citizens, she would have learned how silly her response was. It is trivial, but does this indicate a larger lack of being in touch with ordinary people?
4
To designate someone an Indian can mean two different things. One identifies his race, which can be confirmed by a DNA test. (Because the science if complicated, this confirmation can only stated as a probability.) The other designation refers to his legal standing, which requires documents, just as you need legal documents to prove you are an American citizen.
Warren made a big mistake by not emphasizing that she was claiming to have the former racial designation, not the legal. She wasn't claiming to have a tribal designation. Of course, she was really responding to Trump's asinine and insulting Pocahontas taunts. He challenged her to a DNA test, said he would pay her $1,000,000 if she passed the test. She passed the test and Trump didn't pay up. To lie would have political consequences for any other American president but a Trump lie provokes only a grin and a shrug.
I'm an Indian of both kinds and I favor Warren. She started at the lower end of the playing field and had to fight her way up, unlike Trump. No big deal if she has little Indian blood. She knew many Indians growing up in Oklahoma; she knows what it means to scrape by, and she is fighting to level the playing field, or rather to keep it from tilting even further.
8
@Chasethebear She actually did make that very clear, many times.
2
I don't care who a person is related to, how far back they can trace their lineage. I can trace mine back to and beyond the American Revolution. I have ancestors who fought on both sides of the Civil War. None of that matters at all except in regards to inherited health issues. What matters is who I am. How do you know who I am? Is it by my memberships in various clubs? My connection to famous people or wealthy people? Is it the color of my skin, the curliness of my hair, the elocution of my presentations? NO! You know me by my actions. The same way I will know you. All the rest is interesting falderal. What I do defines me. What any person chooses to do defines that singular person.
1
Who the L cares about her ancestry. I vote on accomplishments. She has my vote.
2
I think it’s the fraud part that has people troubled
1
this is non-issue and matters not, unless you want it to matter,
and want to make a big deal out of nothing,
which you can always find somebody who will...
2
If Warren were to win the primary (by some miracle) it would mean another 4 years of Trump. Stop deluding yourselves.
4
"her likely presidential campaign"? She is DELUSIONAL. There is no way she would win. She should seek a VP role as maybe she could progress from that level in the future.
The strategy of taking a DNA test and then releasing these results was also delusional in thinking it would put an end to this issue. It absolutely just demonstrates how delusional and out of touch she is.
A third party candidate should be licking their chops, as I for one will definitely not vote for Warren or Trump.
5
Ugh, so strident, so bitter, so humorless and artless. So tedious, so draining, so angry and negative. That's just my stand-alone impression of her persona, so don't bother with a hundred retorts of "compared to what?" Compared to nothing at all. I'm just looking at her on tv with the volume on and this is what I feel.
6
The only thing they can find to spin with in a way they can try to frame as against her. So they are milking this for what they can. Meanwhile, her understanding and work on the complicated issues that affect ordinary citizens is unmatched. It's absurd when every day we have to listen to excuses from the White House explaining away obvious corruption and incompetence.
2
The problem isn't whether or not she has Native American DNA. The problem is, and always has been, that we have a president that repeatedly calls her "Pocahontas" as a means to degrade her. Isn't this the real problem - one that we have a 72 year old president that name-calls like a 6th grader and two that he and everyone else assumes that to be called "Pocahontas" is to be insulted. These two things are truly worrisome.
4
The DNA test was a mistake both because it reinforced a racial approach to politics and because the result showed she was no more Native American than most randomly chosen white Americans. Republicans are salivating at the prospect she might be the Democratic nominee for President in 2020. In deep blue Massachusetts she polled fewer 2018 votes than Republican candidate for governor, Charlie Baker.
3
Why are Native Americans so offended by DNA tests. It’s science.
2
Progressive obsession with race claims another victim.
5
Fact: Elizabeth Warren shares a genetic link to Native Americans. She's not claiming tribal rites of any kind. She has an ancestor who was Native American. This FACT cannot be changed. So, this article seems to be about the bullying that has resulted from her DNA profile. (A DNA profile is not political. It is a biological fact.) And, with this analysis, the NYT is participating in and promoting the bullying. Shame of the NYT, and shame of the editor who give this pathetic theme the light of day. The WaPo had the critique of this article and its publication by the NYT just right.
10
Here they go again. I would expect a ridiculous article like this on one of those far-right conspiracy website, not the New York Times. Utterly unacceptable to the expectations people have for this paper.
Lift your game.
7
“'A DNA test is useless to determine tribal citizenship.*"
Surely, Senator Warren could have figured this out beforehand.
******
https://www.wsj.com/articles/harvard-penn-and-the-warren-story-1539798838
1
She didn’t claim tribal citizenship. That’s not why she took the DNA test. You obviously haven’t read the story or followed the issue.
5
Are you starting out on on the level of the Clinton emails "scandal" already???
4
Oh for heaven's sake, NYT. It wasn't enough for you to obsess about Hillary's emails. Now you have to start undermining Warren two years out. You have a bias against women candidates, and that's a fact.
11
lol. non-issue. So glad the NYT feels the need to attack strong women for nothingness.
And, no, we are not worried by this idiocy.
5
Let the hyper critical coverage of female candidates begin...
This article is warranted, but the NYT's current overuse of click-bait titles is really starting to annoy me.
6
You mean--Warren lied about her war service on that swift boat?
Grow up.
5
NYT, do not pile on to this smear campaign. She is one of the few shining lights within the Dem party. Day by day I wonder why I keep reading the Times. (I bet this comment will NOT make it past the mods!)
7
Hey NYT: are you really going to make this mistake again, the same mistake you made with Hillary's emails?
Nobody is talking about her DNA. I have given no thought to that issue and it will have no effect on which candidate I decide to support in 2020.
Do you never learn?
11
Warren is toast. The NYT has spoken. Cherokees clinging as tightly to their racial identities as angry whites? Good luck with that. What’s good for the goose...Really? I know Sweden, Norway or Germany or Italy would never take me back. Screw this identity politics. America is toast.
6
What a tired story. NYT fanning flames. Stick a fork in it. Its dead.
7
For the love of God, NYT, let it go! Don't you have bigger fish to fry? You are a huge part of the problem here. Go report on something REAL.
9
I believe this is a situation of "damned if I do and damned if I don't". Had she not gone forward and had her DNA tested she would be hounded for that. Her initial mistake was using her marginal native ancestry way back during her time at Harvard.
2
Another worthless article about the equivalent of "Hillary's emails." Quit taking the Republican bait, NYTimes editorial staff!
9
In the Shambhala Buddhist tradition it is said that one may "drive all blames into one", by taking responsibility, even if the perceived offense is not your fault. Meaning, perhaps, that it never hurts to apologize if others are unhappy with your actions. This is intended to help stop the blaming process within ourselves. So Senator Warren could certainly apologize without admitting wrongdoing. I believe she should do so privately to aggrieved tribal leaders and move on, whatever their reaction.
It is interesting to learn that she did not consult widely before taking this action. Perhaps she felt it should be a personal decision, or it may represent a failure in her political decision making process. She will learn from this experience, I'm sure.
As a fairly liberal person from Massachusetts,I'll be the first to say Sen Warren is going to have a long road if she runs for President. DNA is the least of her worries. Although I don't like it, many liberals don't get the fact the country has turned way way right. Everyone thought The Donald would burn out, but those that voted for him like him even more. I don't like it, but
that reality
3
I noticed that she got the test secretly. Is that because she intended not to disclose it had turned out even worse? And I wonder how many of these secret tests she had to take to get one showing even a trace of Native American?
6
How much worse could it have been than 1:1024???
2
The family stories we pass down from generation to generation is what makes us who we are, whether they are true or not is irrelevant.
Ms. Warren has always seemed to share this family story as a point of pride about her "Indian heritage;" and, also as proof that discrimination existed even in her own family.
1
I might also have Native American ancesters. My mother died wchen I was nine years old, so I could not clarify it with her when my father told me that my mother's father was Native American. My mother was from Laconia, New Hampshire, which is surrounded with place names related to the tribes that once lived and thrived there. I don't know if it is true, but I like the idea. My mother was also descended from immigrants from England, the first of which came in 1634. I haven't had a DNA test, but I would like to. My other line of descent is Jewish and, given the history of pogfroms, I am curious to know what genes might tell me.
I would never claim to be Native American. I just think it is an interesting aspect of my mother's family history. I do claim to be Jewish although some deny me that right because when I was born, she was not Jewish, and Jewishness is said to be passed through the mother. She later converted, which may or may not cover me.
Who cares? I am what I am, a mosaic of genes from many ancesters. I identify with my Jewish ancestors' history, a cultural identity.
5
Either way this seems like a losing issue for Warren.
But more importantly, let’s get real: she doesn’t have what it takes to win the Democratic nomination, let alone the general election. She’s got a lot of good positions but too many liabilities and not enough natural charisma. I’d love for a woman to be president (I thought it would be Hillary) but Warren isn’t going to be it.
7
Many of us have minute traces of all sorts of ethnic backgrounds but we also understand the difference between that and claiming that we are actually native american, african american, asian, etc.
5
Unfortunately, I think the "Pocahontas" moniker has doomed Senator Warren in the same way that "Low Energy" doomed Governor Bush.
I think it shows appalling judgment on her part to have listed herself as Native American for *11 years* in the Association of American Law Schools (AALS) deskbook between 1985-1996 as she rose up the ranks from the University of Houston Law School to Harvard. There's a big difference between having some Native American ancestry in your distant past (which she has proven and should try to seek her $1M from Trump) and being a blonde haired blue eyed woman with white white skin and pick and choose when she wanted to highlight her distant ancestry.
Somehow, I doubt that Harvard took a Rutgers-Newark law graduate on as a full professor solely because of her teaching record. I'm a lawyer and know first hand how school conscious lawyers and places like Harvard are. So, you can't just say there was *no* effect on her career or on opportunities that were afforded her doing those 11 years and thereafter. I just don't buy it.
Please, Senator Warren, stay in the Senate and do great work there.
PS: No, I am not sexist. I voted for Hillary Clinton for President (and cried when she lost) and Cynthia Nixon for NY Governor (although I did not cry when she lost) most recently.
10
I am a blue eyed blonde who freckles in summer ...no tan just freckles.
My 2 aunts / mother’s sisters, married brothers ...who happened to be half Norwegian and half Alaskan Indian.
All of my cousins look like Indians.
I grew up wishing I had dark hair and didn’t get sunburn.
All those years of growing up and each of us different in looks but as bonded as any children in a family can be, we were blissfully unaware of all of this “skin color eye color ,race identity “ that really needs to pipe down and go away.
We are humans, we come in all shapes and sizes and colors.
The End
2
2020 will be tricky for anyone , who know what lying trump will have up on his sleeves.
Running for Presidency or not, Senator Elizabeth Warren . will always be a great Senator challenging trump in every single issues and lies.
2
She should not run for President. And if she does the Democratic Party should not nominate her. Sorry, but too much is at stake to field a candidate that might be encumbered with this type of distraction. Donald Trump, if he is the GOP nominee in 2020, MUST BE DEFEATED. Any candidate that has even the slightest problem that Trump might exploit must not be nominated.
1
I once respected Ms. Warren but I think this was a huge tactical blunder. Trump's insensitive and derisive use of the name Pocahontas was doing more damage to himself than to Sen. Warren. But now she has given weight to what should have been a non-issue. Taking this test and making a spectacle of announcing the results, which lent very little credence to her claims, looks like an act of desperation and insecurity. Sen. Warren has thoroughly undermined herself and I doubt she can recover.
1
In OK the term 'native American' is understood to denote at least three, possibly intersecting sets:
A) enrolled members of a tribe recognized by the U. S. government;
B) people who identify themselves as native Americans;
C} people with a specific gene type as revealed by DNA.
Sen. Warren is clearly not a member of A).
She is very likely a member of B. Perhaps 2/3 of the people of her age living in eastern OK were told by their parents that they were "part indian".
In some cases family lore may support or document this.
Her DNA test reveals only that she is part if C.
People with no native American DNA may be members of A).
Some native Americans owned slaves. When slaves were freed, the freed slaves were enrolled in the tribe of their former owner.
This is a complex and interesting question. But, it is totally irrelevant to Sen. Warren's qualifications for the presidency.
She appears to be well informed and a good bit smarter than other candidates.
She may be a bit too old.
3
No — only the “Five Civilized Tribes” owned slaves. (And land — Hence the name). These were the the Choctaw, Chickasaw, Creek, Seminole, and Cherokee.
1
@L.Tallchief
Yes.
This i what I intended to say.
1
I have done genealogy research for the last 50 years. Half the people in the midwest will tell you authoritatively that their great-grandmother was "a full-blooded Indian." (In the family lore, it's always a female ancestor.) Inevitably, only a tiny fraction of these claims are true.
3
IMO, Senator Warren's assertions that her mom handed down a story of native American heritage somewhere in their background has been proven, not disproven. The larger fact that most Americans don't want to wrap their heads arounds is that ANY AMERICAN who can claim ancestry on the continent to before 1850 is probably a mix of various stocks...native America, European, African and Asian. If the liaisons that created the ancestor that created the ancestor and so on was consensual is also unknown. I've got no issue with recognizing probable heritages. It's far less odious than claiming a pure or true heritage.
2
Anyone remember Michael Dukakis riding around in an M-1 tank in an attempt to convince voters that he was something he was not? DNA testing to establish her so-called Native American roots is the equivalent moment for Elizabeth Warren and strongly suggests she is not an authentic person, merely one who will do or say anything to get ahead in life. American voters don't generally respond well to that sort of candidate.
5
@Earl W. Thanks for the reminder. That was the first election I was old enough to vote in. Freshman in college and took it pretty seriously. I remember thinking Dukakis looked like Snoopy and just didn’t take him seriously after that. Sen. Warren has zero chance to win outside of extremely liberal enclaves.
2
Unfortunately the country is in the kind of fix that calls for the Democrats to nominate the best candidate who may or may not make the best President.
1
Donald never tells the truth about anything, and the Democrats worry about being right (and politically correct in the process) to 99.999%. I am not suggesting that they ever be dishonest; not at all. They just need to stop shooting themselves in the foot, or they will never win anything.
It one those things that go under the category of not being able to put the genie back into the bottle. Or, sending out and email that you should've thought twice about before sending. This cannot be undone, but may well be the undoing of Ms. Warren. All I can think at this point is Run Bernie, Run.
Criticism should be directed to Native American groups and those on the left who want to use this issue as a platform to educate people who could care less about the nuances of identity, and identity politics in general. It's called closing ranks and it politics, it matters. Just look at those on the right. They are masters at putting aside the personal and supporting their party.
This isn't to say that Native Americans and liberal progressives don't have valid points, because they do. The perennial failure of those on the left is not knowing when something is a teaching moment, and when political expediency requires sacrificing convictions about identity for the greater good.
True, the right has fewer issues with identity politics - they are overwhelmingly white. But those on the left still haven't learned the definition of coalition, and the concept of political expediency. It's no wonder the Alt-Right loves to call the left snowflakes. They elevate the personal to the point where any potential political gain melts in the heat of the debate.
Ms. Warren is validating the oral history of her family, both for personal reasons and to quell a public debate about a private matter; nothing more and nothing less.
10
Elizabeth Warren, although I admire her "gumption", she is polarizing politically.
Unfortunately, she fell in the "rabbit hole" with the DNA test. Democrats need someone that is polished, articulate, however knows when to role out the punches!
7
Senator Warren's attempt to use credible scientific data to rebut accusations and mockeries by Trump about her ancestry is futile because Trump and his underlings pay no attention to or believes anything scientific. I hope Ms. Warren finds better ways to confront Trump.
2
@a goldstein
way to miss the point!
1
This reminds me of when Ronald Regan defused the the “age question” with a single quip, saying that he refused to make an issue out of his opponent’s youth and inexperience. If Warren had simply agreed to take a DNA test if Trump agreed to disclose all the places his DNA has been, she would have one-upped him and shut him up. Instead, she fell for the bait and now has multiplied her problems. I pray that she is not the Democratic candidate in 2020.
6
Elizabeth Warren will be remembered long after Twila Barnes 15 minutes of fame has dissipated. Clearly, not supporting Warren over Trump would signal a very imbalanced sense of politics. Progressivism needs individuals who are not consumed by identity.
7
Donald Trump didn't announce his candidacy until mid-August 2015 — until then, no one considered him seriously. Can we wait at least until mid-2019 before we start this horse-race nonsense, please?
2
I would not be able to analyze the components of my reaction to Elizabeth Warren's Cherokee episode, but although I drink out of an Elizabeth Warren mug, I was embarrassed on many level mentioned below.
She put herself at Trump's level as well.
2
That anyone would even think a story like this is newsworthy, or that the matter itself is worthy of anyone's attention, only provides further evidence that the long-term survival of the human race is, at best, unlikely.
We concern ourselves with the dust in the corner while the roof is caving in atop our heads.
13
I've never seen a picture of here in the NYT where she's smiling. Most of them look as if she's screaming. Not a good look regardless of her qualifications.
5
I was excited to learn that I had Native American blood from a DNA test. Unlike Senator Warren I have no family history to back it up. Somewhere 6 to 8 generations ago I have a Native American ancestor. While I haven't found out who that individual was, it makes me feel even more connected to this great land. I am puzzled by the vehement reaction to Warren's news from all and sundry. Donald does Elisabeth Warren $1,000,000.
5
Well, Democrats, kiss 2020 goodbye. If your leading candidate's biggest issue is who slept with whom 2-300 years ago, well.....just sayin'.
The DNA tests confirm that Ms. Warren has Native American ancestry. So? And Native Americans are outraged by this? Warren isn't claiming anything other than what the DNA tests show. If "liberals" and "populists" are also feigning outrage, is anyone in the room capable of rational thought?
Seems to me like Democrats can't get out of their own way. Who gives a (fill in the blank as you see fit) whether Ms. Warren is part anything? Last time I looked, she's an American citizen, and over 35, which means she meets all the Constitutional requirements to run for President.
Democratic internecine warfare is how Donald Trump got to the White House. The most unqualified candidate in our nation's history walked right in. Has anyone done any polling, to see if Ms. Warren might, a la Michael Dukakis, carry Massachusetts but lose 49 other states? Is she the only serious Democratic candidate with less than 24 months to go before the next election?
Trump can't win in 2020, but it looks like the Democrats are setting out to lose in 2020. God help us all.
9
@alexander hamilton Relax. Take a breath. This is one story, two years before the election.
1
I have a very high percentage of Neanderthal DNA, close to 3%, according to 23andme. Wish I had known about this earlier. Might have boosted my career.
6
I really miss the days when newspapers printed actual NEWS. Now it's all woulda coulda shoulda speculation yadda yadda. She is my SENATOR and I love her work on banking reforms and stricter regulation of financial institutions. She needs to concentrate on becoming a power in the Senate, just as Teddy Kennedy (and Hillary Clinton) were. STOP speculating!!! It's a bore, and it serves no good purpose.
4
Submitting her DNA for testing, and then releasing the results to show that she apparently has a drop of Native American blood, is the same kind of poor judgment she used in playing the identity card in applying for a job at HLS. Seriously, how many HLS professors went to a second rate law school like Rutgers Newark? Harvard showed the same poor judgment.
7
This has very little to do with Elizabeth Warren, and a lot to do with the current stupidity of the Democratic Party.
6
How does this go? Sen. Warren's Native American ancestry is not clear or convincing enough for some people. Trump is an incompetent bully who lies about everything. Yep, just as I thought, she is not qualified.
3
What a country.
We are possibly going to pass on a good leader over a dopey genetics test issue?
We are doomed!!
3
The fact Warren refuses to admit she's not Native American shows she'll go down lying like Trump. Her need to keep a lie alive I find disturbing. Warren cannot see the delusion she believes and that makes her dangerous. At this point, she can't admit she's wrong lest she look stupid so she's politically done when it comes to a presidential nomination. Beto will lay Pocahontas to rest.
3
Dukakis redux.
4
Like so many others in politics...she is a FRAUD.
5
Race functions for the Left as Evolution does for the Right.
4
Warren would make a fine president because she is a decent human being who cares about America and American values. Same for most leading Democrats.
Native American ancestry? Who cares. Trump voters have demonstrated over and over again that they do not care about the truth of anything, as long as they can punish immigrants and minorities.
Democrats have far bigger problems on their mind, like saving the country from Trump and his corrupt band of fascists and traitors.
Are there really independent voters who would be swayed by this, one way or another?
1
Trump was just annoyed because he's all Euro-American and couldn't create a new tribe all his own so he could open a casino ... exempt from both taxes and lawmen.
If he had researched his Scots ancestors, he might easily have found some early Irish or Vikings who mingled with the Skraelings in Newfoundland back in the first millennium. It required too much reading , I suspect.
3
Warren's chances of winning the Dem Nomination are about as good as 'burnt bannock'.
9
How ridiculous. It seems that some people are determined to see her actions in the absolute WORST way possible. Warren's only error was rising to Trump's bait.
"that reconciliation should center Native voices and make sure that their stories of loss and theft of identity come front and center, not, you know, one white woman’s tale of understanding her DNA,"
--Good grief. Finding out where your forebears came from is not 'identity theft'. Warren IS NOT RESPONSIBLE for the history of White folks' treatment of American Indians and she certainly doesn't owe anyone some big festival of atonement in which people 'testify' about how she represents everything evil in America.
"genetic testing has historically been used as a weapon against Native communities,"
--FFS. Why is this even relevant? She foolishly wanted to shut Trump up by finding 'evidence' to support her claim, but SHE DOESN'T WANT ANYTHING FROM THE TRIBES. Not money, not official 'membership', not to take part in expression of tribal customs. Genetic testing is just scientific analysis. Just because one group of people used it as a "weapon" doesn't mean everyone who uses it is guilty of something. I'm so irritated by this nonsense.
10
Excellently put—this is a big load of nonsense!
Maybe I’m just a privileged white woman, but why is this a big deal? Why are we focusing on the far right’s propaganda? Do real conservatives even care that Warren connected and identified with family lore that she had a Native American and than she found out that the families tales were actually true. Oh my! And, seriously, the misinformation (and downright lying in the Washington Times) about Warren’s ancestry blood test are astounding. Warren is 95% European. Most European Americans, excluding those from he Dakotas and New Mexico, are 100% European.
https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwjys8fX7ovfAhULMawKHQKpDqUQzPwBegQIARAC&url=https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/elizabeth-warren-dna-test-fact-check-native-american-ancestry-boston-globe-journalists-trump-a8595001.html&psig=AOvVaw1d3ZLPrLKcz2GM0R0COKjY&ust=1544208394051818
5
What a vile, racist attack on Elizabeth Warren by prominent leaders of the Democratic Left and Native American tribes. Warren has simply told the truth about her background. And then she has provided genetic evidence that corroborates everything that she said. She never said she considers herself a Native American. The president of Harvard has publicly stated that her racial heritage played no role in her hiring or tenure. The carpers, whiners and President Trump are plainly hawking their own political and racist agendas. This is a nonsensical issue over a highly qualified presidential candidate. The only issue should be that Trump welshed on his bet to donate a million dollars to charity that a DNA test would not show any Native American ancestry in her background. Warren does not owe an apology to anyone.
10
The identity claim and DNA test were both foolish. She opened herself to ridicule from the Right and claims of appropriation from the Left. The greatest criticism should be that she was gaming a system that (however misguided) was supposed to benefit Native Americans and organizations that support/promote them. This shouldn't close the door for her but it doesn't help and, aside from this, she doesn't exactly check all the boxes for an ideal candidate.
What this incident should expose is that the Democratic Party needs to move away from identity politics. By embracing identity as a core value, the Party is playing a dangerous game. The rules are unclear. The penalties are huge. And it is nearly impossible to win when the nominee must be a single individual.
If we're going to make the country a better place, we have to get beyond identity politics. But the Democratic Party doesn't get this. Witness all the celebration about the women elected this past November. And the people of color. And the LGBT people. We have to learn to take identity in stride and not make it the focus of our attention. Otherwise, what do we do with a presidential candidate who is male? What do we do with a presidential candidate who is white? What do we do with a presidential candidate who is cisgender or heterosexual? Identity politics needs to be discarded but there's no indication that Democrats are going to learn this in time.
7
@SJG. The news reports of the new crop of legislators-to-be reminded me of the story of Noah’s Ark. “And he brought them into the ark two by two, etc.”. In this case, 2 Native American women, 2 Muslim women electees, etc. identity politics helped elect Trump. Spare us.
1
I think the telling problem with this latest iteration of her explanation, as noted in this article, is how she's damaged her standing with tribal and racial minorities because she was obtuse about what "race" means, what "minority" means, etc. She and her team have handled this poorly from the start. The best response she could have given was provided by Hunter, in the NYT picks section. She should have led with that and stuck with it. If indeed the ancestry question was as trivial as Hunter describes, what's the fuss about? Trump didn't start this discussion though. It came up in her first run for office. Her handling of this over the course of her political career is a legitimate reason to judge a candidate running for office negatively. Vetting applicants doesn't make Democrats a 'circular firing squad.'
That being said, we tend to judge women on a binary, Good/Bad system more than we do with men. It leaves her and other female candidates with fewer options in how they respond. In film noir parlance, she may have been hoping to avoid the femme fatal (distrusted, self-contained) label, such as Hillary was stuck with, by embracing the damsel in distress (open, honest, naive, answers all questions during interrogation) label. This crisis in her candidacy is partly all of our fault.
1
As someone who has found unknown close relatives through a DNA test - including a brother I first learned about at age 50 - I'm really happy that Elizabeth Warren and anyone else who wants to is taking a DNA test. The idea that she shouldn't makes no sense to me. Everyone has the right to know. Families have had all sorts of secrets for years (paternity, race, etc.), and DNA is making these secrets fall away. I'm sure there are some people who will be hurt though this (e.g. the person whose ancestry wasn't what they were told, or my brother who had thought someone else was his dad till he was 50), but I prefer the truth over lies. My only concern is having my DNA out there for the insurance companies to use...
5
Of course, Senator Warren handled this wrong. Native American friends( and their friends) on Facebook were aghast at the situation; it pushes any number of buttons for them. I believe it is too late for the Senator to apologize and any Presidential Campaign will be swamped by the claims surrounding her anscestory. While she is not my Senator, I would have given her a hard look for presidency, but she’s been tone deaf on the
native issue and dna testing, which is a problem.
3
Ms. Warren did not "play into Trump's hands" when she released the "slick video" about her Native American Heritage- her "progressive" critics did.
This was the box her put her in- and they helped.
4
I am a steadfast Democrat, and I like most of Warren's positions, but let's be clear about what happened here. Elizabeth Warren did not have the academic vita typically required of white faculty to gain a Harvard Law School faculty appointment. Allowances are granted to minority faculty hires, however. Everyone familiar with academic hires and admissions knows this. She therefore tried to capitalize on a family myth involving being Native American in order to put herself in the separate stack of "minority applicants". She figured if she was later challenged on it at Harvard, she could fall back on the explanation "But my grandparents always said...." Harvard didn't challenge her, however, because they want to be able to claim some diversity on the faculty, so they played along. Everything was fine until she became a Senator with this gross exaggeration, possible lie, on her vita. When she came up with some DNA results that suggest some vague Native American association, she tried to bank on it, and lost big. This was a sham that has blown up. She never suffered the cost of being Native American, only found significant benefit in appropriating the identity when it was convenient. It was driven by ambition to gain a Harvard faculty spot, and she knew what she was doing. It was shameful and it will be the end of her presidential ambitions, for good reason.
11
With so many of the public already involved and engaged in genealogic data and stories of their own experiences, it is clear there is a nominal DNA baseline that may suggest Senator Warren has the equivalent of a margin of error amount of native anecestry. The very fact that she wants to continue debating an issue that will never be resolved in her favor, suggests a Warren run for the white house would be replacing dumb with dumber. Best left to Shakespeare...Life's but a walking shadow, a poor player that struts and frets her hour upon the stage and then is heard no more: it is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.
1
Just a nonsense hit-piece to create controversy where there shouldn't be any. People criticized her for saying she has Native American blood and she proved it. Where is the offense in that? Trump uses slurs to refer to her on the regular and we're getting upset with her? She isn't claiming she's a tribal member, just that she has Native American ancestry. The ultra-left panic machine has outdone itself on this one. 100% with Warren on this one. What a waste of ink, @nytimes - total non-story. Great work on the Facebook reporting but the editor on this story should never have approved it. In case it counts for anything, I'm a digital subscriber and would rather not see nonsense stories like this in the future. Don't "report on the controversy" - report on facts, legitimate and reasonable developments that the public should be kept aware of. Junayd Mahmood
3
Why is the Times featuring this aspect of this story? How about observing that Senator Warren's statement puts Trump in the position of welshing on or losing his bet "if she could prove ANY amount of native American in her ancestry".
Trump or his people understand this. You won't hear Trump say Pocahontas ever again.
2
Unbelievable that she made the decision to take a DNA test to reveal her ancestry based on the taunts of the charlatan-in-chief. Why would anyone sensible ever condescend to do that? Let me state my view on Ms. Warren, ladies and gentlemen. She's an OK Senator from Massachusetts but she is NOT "presidential timber", meaning that one sure way to hand the charlatan another 4 years and allow the continued defilement of our institutions would be to nominate Warren as the Democratic nominee. She can NOT win a General Election and frankly, while I will never cast my ballot ever again for a person who runs as a Republican, my support for her candidacy would be limited to one action - holding my nose and pulling the lever for her, because I'm not at all enamored of her approach to politics or her general demeanor.
3
Yes, PLEASE run in 2020.
7
It's all about identity politics. Whether her status as a woman, or her status as a Native-American, or her status as a Latina, or her status as an African-American, or her status as a homosexual or a transgender person, or some other identity. That is all that matters for progressives. Progressives need a hammer to claim that Republicans are [racist][misogynist][homophobic][etc.]. Elizabeth Warren needs some identity to look special, and being a woman no longer cuts it as a "special" identity, especially in law schools (when she first started claiming Native-American status).
2
Wall Street will never let it happen. She’d turn the country into Venezuela.
3
I like and respect her, but she, Biden, Clinton, Sanders, et al., are simply too old to run for president. I'm hardly ageist (I'm 66), but the Democrats need to nominate someone under 65!
3
Warren comes off Petty and inconsequential more and more. She had An impressive resume, but really ruined it with just...lack of charisma and attention to Who the freak cares issues like her Native American heritage. It took years for me to get to this opinion, but I’m here- bored; underwhelmed. A bit embarrassed. Is this really the best we have? She’s clearly not an inspirational leader.
5
Taking this DNA test was the right thing to do. With it Elizabeth Warren confirmed exactly what she said all along, and never did she claim tribal membership. Now that it's done she needs to move beyond this idiotic debate, as do we all. If she wants to discuss this privately with Native American leaders to shore up their support and help them to see the light then fine. But if Ms. Barnes has trouble getting her "jaw" off "the floor" then let it stay there.
As one of the most sensitive and intelligent members in Congress, Warren has so much to offer working families and average Americans that getting tangled anymore in this petty discussion is a wasteful distraction.
258
@WK Green As I pointed out earlier, her continuing to claim any real descendancy to Native Americans from such a de minimis percentage of POSSIBLE DNA relationship to this ethnic group is preposterous, demonstrates dramatically poor judgment and is why so many tribal leaders are appalled at her claim and is why she is so roundly mocked by conservatives. For a woman like her to continue the claim of such descendancy is disrespectful and an insult to true Native Americans.
4
@aestheticsense
I claimed for years that I was mostly Irish because that's what I'd been told. Took a DNA test and found that I'm mostly Scandinavian (probably vikings that invaded and pillaged Ireland) and just about 5% Irish. I humbly apologize to any true Irish people who I may have offended in the past with my claims.
22
@Ben The problem is a lot of people probably don't even get that your last sentence is hilarious. I used to claim that I was at least one-fourth English because I was told that my paternal grandfather (who died before I was born) came to the United States from England (when he was around twelve years old). I just learned yesterday from official documents that both of my grandfather's parents had emigrated from Germany to England. Does that mean my grandfather was really German and that I'm really one-fourth German? I really don't know, and it really does not matter because, as the Santana song says, everybody's everything.
13
She shouldn’t even consider running, it’s a disaster waiting to happen
5
Looking at some of these comments, I think that along with the 'recommend' option you need to start including a 'laughing' option.
7
I don't see a problem with her owning her dna history and sharing it. It is a factual part of her make up. All of the people saying it was a mistake are actually pushing her to hide her identity. She is proud of having some Native American dna in the 'woodpile' and owns it.
3
Let's be honest, if I were a Democrat I would see what is abundantly clear, she is as unelectable as Ms. Clinton, especially in the Midwest. The Solution? A Moderate Dem from the middle of the country, but that wouldn't get as many HuffPost buzz, though.
11
Is Elizabeth Warren to be our Hillary punching bag as we barely begin to think about 2020? Has the media learned nothing from 2016 when we were inundated with articles about Hillary and Benghazi and/or her emails? All right, so there are some who absolutely do not want a woman president, but let's be reasonable. If trump or some other "republican" claimed to have some Native American ancestry, would there be such an outcry?
5
Much as it pains me greatly every time I am too slow in changing the TV channel & have to watch President Trump try to imitate Marlon Brando's tough guy scowl from "On the Waterfront"; I can't help think that it might be even worse to see Ms. Warrens pained righteousness look on the screen.
4
This "issue" is beyond absurd. Liberals (or "progressives", whatever) should focus on her accomplishments, her programs and her serious ideas on greater economic equality in the United States. Statements such as “If she wants to be considered the leader of our party or the leader of the progressive movement, she needs a reconciliation...And that reconciliation should center Native voices and make sure that their stories of loss and theft of identity come front and center, not, you know, one white woman’s tale of understanding her DNA...” are wholly tangential (and truly Trumpian in their tortured syntax).
6
The arguments of some progressives native Americans and European nationalists seem to be converging on the issue of purity.
The tea party and others have already been down that road and it leads nowhere.
1
This nonsense with the DNA is irrelevant.
EW is not electable as far as POTUS goes.
If the Dems want to win in 2020 they need to get serious and look for a white guy who can draw a significant amount of votes in flyover country. I know that isn't what the kids want to hear, but we have to be ruthlessly honest and practical here.
Our house is on fire. We have to nominate someone who appeals to both sides, not hold out for a progressive dream date who has no chance of winning.
6
@EK Sherrod Brown from Ohio! With Louisiana's Edwards as VP.
1
An unelectable dream date? You mean, like Obama?
This whole thing is a bad joke. Warren gets blasted by the president on a routine basis as he name calls her with a derogatory slur and instead of there being a tidal wave condemnation against him she is catching all of the flack.
All she claimed was that there had been family stories of Native American ancestors handed down and she took a test to see if it was true. She never claimed to be a part of any tribe or nation. If she has ancestors they had to be part of some tribe or nation and consequently she has a connection. Nothing more and nothing less. Sheesh! Get over it people. Talk about PC gone mad...
1
@Magan - but she didn't just make anecdotal claims to Native American ancestry - she ticked boxes on official forms. She may be clever but she ain't too smart.
I think what supporters of Warren are completely overlooking is that she checked a box on multiple job applications that said she was Native American. This has been noted by all major news sources. Bottom line she took opportunities away from true minorities. It is a complete disservice to minorities. I would never check a box that says I'm Native American or African American because I have family stories that say perhaps I am? She isn't living a life of a Native American nor does she have any real family history or members that said they truly did as well and that is why I think the Cherokee Nation is offended by her. Her having whatever it is of Mexican blood doesn't prove anything. When she published the food recipes she literally signed her name and under it wrote Cherokee. Warren claims she never said she was apart of 'The Nation' but than how can you check a minority job box saying you are Native American or sign a publication saying you are Cherokee? She should be embarrassed and I don't understand why her supporters can't just admit and say - 'you know that was wrong of her and she shouldn't be claiming she is of an ethnic group when she really doesn't have any true heritage to support it or let alone be able to check a very important box that says yes I'm a minority to get a job. Her deciding to check the minority box when there are true minorities out there is really what upsets me and how voters can still support her knowing this blows my mind.
5
@Condeleezza2020 - There is absolutely no evidence that Warren tried to gain any sort of ethnic advantage. In fact the Boston Globe investigated this exhaustively and came up with nothing on this. Everyone who was interviewed who had anything to do with hiring her claimed that her ancestry played NO ROLE whatsoever. Furthermore the existing record of applications to schools and early jobs show that she applied as "white" or as "non-minority".
I'm surprised that the NY Times monitors allowed this one through. A quick visit to Snopes or Fact Check will confirm that it is almost entirely false.
2
To the NYT, please don't do this. This is a distraction about a truly viable candidate. Don't focus on this nonsense. Start focusing on the great things that Warren is actually doing. She is for the regular consumer and wishes to protect them. She stands for keeping regulations that keep the Big Banks from having another meltdown that almost took our country down during the great recession.
Don't make the mistake of the past election where Mrs. Clinton was continually trashed on garbage. It permitted the despicable Trump to take over the election.
5
Why do Democrats play trump's game? Elizabeth Warren had every right to issue a challenge of her own which is: I'll show proof of my ancestry if you show your (un-readacted) tax returns. Period.
1
Why is she so hung up on this? Aren't we all human beings more alike then not alike? Such a waste of precious time. I don't get it.
2
That was a blunder on the part of Senator Warren, giving in to trump’s insults being a smart politician.
She should have let it be to prove her ten some generation ago of smigen of America Indian Ancestry.
It was also an insult of American Indians struggling for generations for acceptance in their own Country, when rest of us are immigrants from somewhere including trump.
3
Let the perfect liberal candidate cast the first stone. What exactly is the appropriate response to a name calling misogynist bully? Where is that written? I encouraged her to settle the argument, once and for all. I thought those tests would either validate her claims or clear her of constant criticism. She did this to learn the truth, no matter which way the evidence pointed. She is entitled to that truth, in spite of what anyone else thinks. She is not seeking recognition from anyone else. She risked being proven wrong, but was instead found to have some DNA related to some natives. And now she is told that the test itself promotes racism? Yet an entire industry, promoted by Henry Louis Gates, and researched by millions of Americans, does not view DNA research as racist. How are any of us imperfect humans to ever know what is acceptable behavior? Trump daily maligns and hates everyone, including native Americans, but she is expected to never make a misstep. Consider the totality of her life in public service. She works for the people, all Americans, for decades, yet is now to be punished for a flawed response to a bully. I am curious, what is the proper response to a bully? Punch in the nose? Tell the teacher? Call the police? Somebody tell me, because the only response the Republicans give is obedient submission.
3
Rather than an article on Warren's policy positions and actions on health care, the environment, Wall Street, and other issues that affect millions of lives, it seems like presidential election journalism - for lack of a better term - will continue these "man bites dog" stories. Can we kick these "who would you rather have a beer with" yahoos off the proverbial bus?
3
@Walter Do a search on the Times site for her. The paper has extensively covered her policy positions.
So Twila Barnes, a Cherokee genealogist, will not vote for Warren for president, even if Warren is running against Trump. Good thinking. You are too pure of heart to vote for the not psychotic, not racist, not philandering, not money laundering, not employer of the undocumented while bashing immigrants, WOMAN. I saw people make the same self righteous excuses for voting against Hillary, and look what that got us. So Warren took a DNA test. Get over it. If DNA does not define being Native American, then the DNA test is meaningless. Look at Warren's record. Forget the DNA. Every vote for someone other than the Democratic nominee ensures that Trump and his swamp creatures will grind us into the muck for another 4 years. Can the republic survive that?
3
I like Warren's positions, but she fell into Trump's trap, even after years of warnings. Letting his taunts affect her behavior was a foolish and fatal error in her pursuit of the presidency.
4
The Democrats obsession with racial identity politics is self-consuming and threatens the viability of all their potential 2020 candidates. Robespierre would understand.
2
The Boston Globe did an exhaustive investigation of this matter, seemingly reviewing every available document and interviewing every available witness. Anyone interested in the "facts" of what happened (although I suspect many are not) should read this: https://www.bostonglobe.com/news/nation/2018/09/01/did-claiming-native-american-heritage-actually-help-elizabeth-warren-get-ahead-but-complicated/wUZZcrKKEOUv5Spnb7IO0K/story.html
The conclusion was that Warren did self-identify as Native American, but NOT on college applications as many on the right are claiming, and NOT in connection with her application for any academic position, but only AFTER she had obtained tenured positions at Penn State and Harvard.
Thus, the available evidence seems to be that she did this solely for emotional reasons or for her own ego, rather than for any tangible gain. While that may have been wrong given her admittedly minimal Native American ancestry, I'm wondering how we should rank her transgression as compared with, say, a guy who was forced to pay $25 million to the defrauded students of Trump University, who stole from his own charity, who had sex with porn stars while his wife was home nursing her newborn son, who paid his adulterous lovers six figure sums to keep quiet, and who bragged about sexually assaulting women? If THAT guy can be elected president, is there really any reason we can't forgive poor Elizabeth Warren for her harmless "Native American" fantasy?
4
This seems like the making of "her emails" to me (and I don't even like Hillary) ... Might want to focus on what she actually wants to get done instead of repeating the same garbage.
1
This is a question THE NEW YORK TIMES cannot or will not ask politicians-state or federal...a question so simple, it is hard: "Where is the proclamation ratified by the voters to amend the United States Constitution to make the health, welfare, safety and benefits of a select group of U.S./State citizens distinguishable because of their Indian ancestry/race?"
"It has pushed Ms. Barnes, a self-described liberal, to make something of a personal pledge: She will never vote for Ms. Warren under any circumstance, including in an election against Mr. Trump."
Dear Ms. Barnes,
Seriously? Grow up. Really.
Sincerely,
- MikeP
1
Given the New York Times' success in assisting in the defeat of Hillary Clinton in 2016, apparently the paper is now deciding to start early in pecking away at Elizabeth Warren.
Note to the Times: the DNA test is an issue ginned up by Republicans and given legs by the inevitable penchant of fringe progressives for self-harm. Nobody else cares much unless the Times plans to make this a regular series for the next 2 years to ensure it doesn't go away.
Bernie is too old. Get over it.
2
How did Elizabeth Warren ever get herself mired in this mess?
By making it about herself and not about the real issues faced today by Native Americans.
1
Grrrr, this entire debate is so ill-informed and frustrating. I'm a progressive and an advocate for racial justice. I'm also a biologist. And the uproar over Warren's DNA test does not make any sense to me at all. She was challenged (and ridiculed) on a factual matter: did she have a recent Native American ancestor? Since her detractors would not accept her family's oral history, she offered the only other piece of evidence that was available: a DNA test, which suggested exactly what her family history described - a Native American great-great-grandparent. Before and after the DNA test, Warren never purported to BE a member of a tribe, nor did she claim any benefits intended at Native Americans. In fact, she has explicitly disavowed the idea that a DNA test could confer tribal identity. I do not understand why anyone - especially Warren's erstwhile supporters on the left - is upset about this, or why they are demanding an apology. Apologize to whom? For what?
459
@Amber Kerr She has identified as Native American and used that identity to get grants and education.
I'm of greater Native American heritage than her, and I am so white people put on shades when they talk to me. I am not Native American. Thats's ludicrous.
11
@Amber Kerr
People are upset because she miss-represented herself by framing herself as one connected to a minority. She clearly isn't what most people would classify as a minority, and she doubled down on this view with the DNA test. While I agree the whole argument is ridiculous, she should have realized that too and not even mentioned it.
114
Her detractors were ridiculous and she should not have responded to them. She romanticized a family legend. Not the same as lying or cheating. But she failed on the policy end. Instead of bringing Native policy issues forward, she kept them locked in her family's romantic past. Not a socially acuitive response to a name-calling tirade, even if it was scientifically correct.
9
Like many people in Tennessee my wife had loads of family lore about having Cherokee ancestors and her grandad looked very Native American, but while some of her DNA sample remained undetermined, no portion was specifically reported as Native American.
2
The issue is that she used the race card to get ahead.
She then accepted mentions, accolades and more based on a made up claim.
Then when the test came back proving she was 1/1000 whatever she was claiming to be, she used that as ‘proof’, upsetting her enemies, supporters and the people she claims to be a part of.
I think that she has the same chance as Rachel Dolezal, another idiot who appropriated a culture to benefit from her claim.
So yea, run her Democrats, please do. The election will be over quick and fast and you can move on to find a real candidate for 2024.
Until then, she is wasting your time, and proving the Democrats are laughably out of touch with reality.
Just ask yourselves, is this really how you want the world to see your party? Please, don’t make me laugh more at you.
4
She didn't make it up. Her parents told her. Give her a break here. No well-bred child in Oklahoma would dream of calling his or her parents liars. She's only guilty of buying into a romantic family myth rather than focusing on current Native policy issues.
1
@Patricia - but she didn't just recount what her parents had told her, she ticked boxes on forms.
I doubt her parents would have been offended if their 'well-bred' daughter had omitted to do that that on the grounds of irrelevance - One might even hope they would have praised her for not seeking potential advantageous on a tenuous pretext.
Republican messaging, assisted by Democrats who love circular firing squads and the troll-osphere, is in play here.
Elizabeth Warren is an effective messenger in favor of ordinary people and has the weapons and knowledge to go after the big 'uns.
But Republicans and trolls are good at this, and the gullible are too stupid to see they are being played.
11
@Susan Anderson
"Elizabeth Warren is an effective messenger in favor of ordinary people and has the weapons and knowledge to go after the big 'uns."
Susan, i'd love to vote for her. And i'm not even a Democrat. What i hope she learns from this mess is to skip the grandstanding, tweeting, and ID politics, and please just stick to the big picture of how we're all getting hosed by the banks, corporations, nimbys, monopolists, and more. The problem is how to convince her to avoid the bait.
Personally I'm glad she did this test and also that the family lore was shown to be correct. Unlike DNA results from Ancestry.com et cetera, these results have been analyzed in detail, and are unlikely to be 'refined' significantly (I've looked at the actual scientific report through a link at the Boston Globe).
Why shouldn't she do the test and publish the results?
Now the other question:
I personally don't object to her candidacy- i find her sensible and likable- but I think it would be a mistake for the Democrats to seriously consider a presidential run, given that she's already been demonized by the right and a large proportion of our more naive citizens hate her guts because of this. The Democrats need to find someone less polarizing, to appeal to the center. That's what I would recommend, but I'm not in charge. :) Best wishes to her & kudos for speaking out against Trump.
2
If the Democratic Party ignores the sea change toward younger candidates more in contact with current issues, it is going to be sorry. No matter how badly the party treated Warren, Pelosi, etc, it should get the message: a new crowd got out the vote. And it was a crowd led by a lot of very interesting, intelligent, and savvy younger women. The party powers that be should listen to that crowd when thinking about the next elections. I would love to see more articles about such alternatives instead of the candidates my generation had hoped would be our first woman President.
3
I've read all the criticisms of Warren, and for the life of me I don't understand what she did wrong. In the world of identity politics there are always individuals looking for a grievance, but in this case I think they've made one up out of whole cloth. Those who object to Warren's DNA test and the statements she's made about it are on a par with people who complain about a "war on Christmas."
10
@Forrest Chisman
Her "ancestry" was ludicrously remote, even if what was picked up was Native American (rather than, as many suggest, Peruvian or Central American). It betrayed a sycophantic determination to bend the truth for political purpose.
Yes, yes--so does our POTUS, and he is excoriated by some for it. But everyone knows he does it and besides he, unlike Warren, is expert in deflecting criticism either to another subject or the "larger picture". She is a highly literal scold.
1
@Wine Country Dude whatever the shortcomings of the test, SHE didn't conduct it and SHE didn't interpret it and so SHE isn't "bending the truth" about anything. So I don't see why you have a problem WITH HER.
2
Isn't this kerfuffle really about political correctness? We don't need more political correctness. We deserve our representatives to care about America, Americans, and the world. Elizabeth Warren, I believe, tried to do the right thing having the DNA test and sharing the results of it.
My opinion of her hasn't diminished.
Ms. Warren, I believe, took the DNA test to demonstrate that her representation of herself as having Native American ancestry was truthful, and it was.
Those who say Ms. Warren through her use of a DNA test and the public release of it propagated and demonstrates support of "racial science" over-react.
I don't care one whit about Ms. Warren's ancestry or her racial makeup. She has shown me plenty enough of her character and her political beliefs. Those qualities and points of view matter. She has my support and that hasn't changed.
11
Elizabeth Warren is where she serves best - as an agitator and antagonist. But she is not a good policy maker. Her arrogance in designing the CFPB to avoid normal oversight is what led to its downfall. Her insistence that she is the only one who knows what is right makes her incapable of compromise - or sometimes even of seeing where compromise is needed. Her unfailing antagonism has been helpful in some cases, but it would not make for a good presidency. She should not run; she should stay in the senate, whatever her ancestry.
Her decision to double down on her Native American ancestry is so tone-deaf that it proves my point.
6
This falls into the same category as Hillary Clinton's emails: little real importance, much exaggeration, and something that will never go away, thereby keeping real issues from being discussed.
6
Perhaps Ms. Barnes' statement was misrepresented, but I too would like to know how genetic testing has "historically been utilized as a weapon against Native communities." Sen. Warren's genetic testing has only been around for a couple of decades. The actual weapons used against American Indians were deportation, strategic starvation and genocide. Those who survived were faced with systematic social and economic apartheid.
Her claim to Indian ancestry is irritating, but if you look at census records since 1980, you'll notice it's become quite common. It's also understandable. Identity politics and consumer culture confer status and value on self-expression and being different.
Perhaps it's better that Sen. Warren find out now that identity politics is a toxic minefield fundamentally incompatible with her populist economic message. Choose one or the other, but trying to have both will only draw her deeper into controversy - you can never be sensitive enough - whilst driving away those of us with a regrettably boring genetic ancestry.
3
@Gary F.S. You have inserted the incendiary word 'genocide' in your reply referencing the various wars between Indian tribes and U.S. military...please provide your sources if you can...if you cannot provide sources for your use of the word 'genocide' in your post, your post then is merely your unsubstantiated opinion that is misguided at best, disingenuous at worst as no one is alive today that experiences any of the wars more than 130-years ago. And, with rare exception, the Indian tribes lost the wars to superior U.S. military and with their loss, the land.
She shouldn't run. She can't win. She should stay in the Senate and do what she does, and with luck she'll be in the majority and be able to make a real difference.
4
Masha Gessen of the New Yorker said it best:
"Warren ended up providing one of the clearest examples yet of how Trumpian rhetoric shifts the political conversation. The woman who is hoping to become the most progressive Democratic nominee in generations is not merely letting herself get jerked around by a Trumpian taunt. She is also reinforcing one of the most insidious ways in which Americans talk about race: as though it were a measurable biological category, one that, in some cases, can be determined by a single drop of blood. Genetic-test evidence is circular: if everyone who claims to be X has a particular genetic marker, then everyone with the marker is likely to be X. This would be flawed reasoning in any area, but what makes it bad science is that it reinforces the belief in the existence of X—in this case, race as a biological category. Warren’s video will hardly convince a Trump voter, who will see only a woman who feels that she has to prove something. Trump himself has already walked back his promise of a million-dollar charity donation. Warren, meanwhile, has allowed herself to be dragged into a conversation based on an outdated, harmful concept of racial blood—one that promotes the pernicious idea of biological differences among people—and she has pulled her supporters right along with her."
3
I see as she poked the bear back in the eye. Good for her.
1
I love Elizabeth Warren - but she is not the Democratic candidate to take the Presidential Office against Trump. We need someone else and cannot have another Hillary Clinton situation ever again.
1
Many Americans have some degree of Native American ancestry. However, unlike Warren most don't use the small percentage of their heritage to justify claims like she has done. If Warren is "Native American" in any sense of the word then aren't we all?
1
It's not her problem as everyone has questionable family stories. She is a very qualified candidate.
Its Harvard and their intersectional ideology that trumpeted her native heritage - they are at fault. They set up the impression that she was a minority hire.
This has dragged Senetor Warren, who has a strong message on the economy, into the swamp of identity politics. Where the GOP want to fight.
2
Family lore doesn't excuse trying to gain an unfair admissions advantage. Warren is anglo in society's eyes, with all the privilege that brings.
What is more important is that she is so tone deaf and incapable of seeing how her elitist behavior comes across. I only hope that if she makes the mistake of running we quickly help her to close out that candidacy before she takes us into a 2nd Trump term.
1
I don't see what the fuss is about: Senator Warren is merely saying that she has a broad ethnic heritage that connects her with the continent's original inhabitants and distant Native American cousins; she makes no claim of membership in a tribe of that this has been a particularly important part of her identity except it makes her mindful of how connected we all are to each other and the myth of ethnic or racial purity.
I believe Winston Churchill made similar assertions about Native American ancestry (expressing pride in the matter) through his mother, Brooklyn native Jennie Jerome. I wonder what Trump and his ilk would have said when it came to Churchill had Trump been president then. "Lend Lease? Forget that; I don't deal with Squanto!"
The fault here is entirely with Warren's critics. If Warren were to exaggerate the connection, maybe a problem-- but she certainly hasn't done that.
6
According to the fact-checking site Snopes, when Warren was at U. Penn. Law School in the mid-80's she put herself on the “Minority Law Teacher” list as Native American in the faculty directory of the Association of American Law Schools. There's no evidence that she benefitted academically or professionally from this claim and it's conceivable she claimed to be a "minority" and Native American for other than self-serving reasons.
When questioned about this decades later, Warren initially said she'd determined herself to be Native American (and thus a "minority") on the basis of "family lore." Then she hired a DNA tester whose results reportedly indicated that she is between 98.44 per cent and 99.9 per cent NOT Native American, yet she used these results to support her claim to be Native American in some meaningful sense (e.g., meaningful enough to have once listed herself as "minority" and Native American in the aforementioned faculty directory). Talk about digging in one's heels.
5
Seriously. This is an issue? Conservatives make fun of her? Really? What incredible pettiness. Even if it wasn't the best move on her part, it is so inconsequential. Honestly who would really want to run for President today?
4
I'm concluding here that the best way Warren could have responded to Trump's taunts would have been to use them as an opportunity to highlight Native American issues rather than defend her own DNA. Indians are talking about decolonization and recovery of their communities. There could have been a good productive discussion of how the govrrnment can help with that project. Instead now it's all about Warren and her vague unannounced hopes for 2020. Sigh.
I'd really rather talk about the project of recovery and decolonization of distressed communities. As a liberal, that is the part I am supposed to care about here.
The blowback to Senator Warren's publication of her DNA test is not so much due to the particular genes ensconced therein, but is rather about how a brilliant, charismatic, attractive, driven, and talented white person wishes to claim the victimhood and any associated benefits from a historically downtrodden group. Senator Warren is trying to strip from Native Americans one of the few remaining dignities afforded by modern society, that of an affirmation of their suffering, and to drape this victimhood around her own shoulders.
5
Thus far, Senator Warren seems to be the only political leader with a solid plan to address income inequality. She astutely focuses on the obscene level of corruption permeating our government and the corrupting influence of corporations. As recent convulsions in France indicate, socialized capitalism doesn't work for working people.
1
If Senator Warren ran the idea of taking a DNA test past any Native American leader, they would have advised her against it straightaway because of the fraught and complicated issues surrounding blood quantum and dubious claims of Native ancestry.
Clearly reaching out to tribal elders wasn’t even on her radar, and shows just how far detached she is from the community she claims to be a part of.
2
Most of us learn about our heritage through family stories. Elizabeth Warren is no different. DNA testing has been used to prove all manner of heritage as well as proving rape, murders and other circumstances where proof is needed. It is a common occurrence now.
I can fully understand why Senator Warren did this. Between Howie Carr and Trump she was trying to get this issue to go away
Everyone giving advice to the Senator needs to take a deep breath and stop panicking. They are making a distraction take away from what would be a legitimate Presidential Primary bid by a very talented and committed person.
Warren is a true consumer advocate and a woman who knows what is needed by the ordinary citizens, like good Health Care, public education, voter rights and the Separation of Church and States. The Republicans cannot hold a candle to her especially Donald Trump.
There is a dire threat to our Country and it’s Democracy. That is what her Advisors should be concentrating on, not her DNA test.
They have an opportunity to make lemonade out of a lemon. They should start squeezing.
4
I have cousins who are 1/4 Cherokee and they never refer to their ancestry because it's a nonissue. And when you are legitimately something, whatever that something may be, you don't go around trying to prove it all the time. The lady doth protest too much, methinks.
2
I am a third generation pro-labor Democrat. To the extent Democrats such as Warren, Kamala Harris, Gillibrand, and others try to use identity politics as a platform, I hope they lose. Focusing on race, gender, ethnicity, or sexual orientation was a credential for elected office is only perpetuating the other side of a historical problem, not vanquishing it. When lines are drawn around a specific demographic group which is then touted as "better" or "newer" or "more of what we need" it serves to strengthen the opposing racism and misogyny and xenophobia among those who follow Trump. There are always two sides of the identity politics coin, and Democrats like Warren and Harris are playing into it in the worst way. Trump won with identity politics, and he or others will win with it again if Democrats like these keep it alive. Notice that Bernie Sanders and Cory Booker don't use this strategy, and notice, soon, how much more effective they will be as candidates who focus on economic justice issues that impact the vast majority of us, across identities.
3
She is way too nerdy and professorial to appeal to the masses. I applaud her efforts, going back to her Harvard days, to fight for stronger consumer protections. I don't think that she is well suited for a brutal presidential campaign.
2
It is stories like this pursuing sales, clicks and profit by the media, that got Donald Trump elected and may get him re-elected. What should be a minor blip becomes major because the press makes it so. Whatever happened to "All the news that's fit to print"? This isn't.
2
If JFK could have persuaded the group of Protestant ministers assembled in Texas and decades late Obama could have dissociated himself from his minister's cursing America, Sen Warren ought to be able to address this without prejudicing a possible run for the presidency, even in this age of her provocateur who has evaded far worse by greater orders of magnitude and by traditional standards of morality.
But if not, this old observer's got to wonder whether there's a genuine possibility of ever righting the ship that is today the USA and that heretofore the world has pinned its last best hopes on.
1
This article either misses the point or purposefully misstates the facts. Warrens test results demolished her claim to her Indian heritage because the amount was infinitesimal, smaller than half of the average scores of all Americans of European extraction in their data base.The second point is that any person who has worked in either academia or large private sector employers understand that these institutions put a premium on hiring minorities. These preferences encourage unscrupulous applicants to claim a non existent minority heritage. This is not the only dodgy aspect of Warren's background. Warren poses as a Social Justice Warrior and a populist politician who made millions as a corporate defense lawyer for the Asbestos Industry.
3
If she runs it would absolutely cement a victory for Trump. It will be the Hillary emails all over again except this time the whole indian thing. She will try to fight back with logic, common sense and facts and lose miserably because Americans don't want reality, they want a reality show and that is what Trump will deliver.
3
She shouldn’t have brought it up in the first place. Doing DNA testing only made the situation worse. The problem for her is this whole thing is silly. It isn’t politically relevant but it dominates the news about her and makes her seem like not a serious candidate. Trump’s insults are just distraction bombs. Replying to them directly just amplifies their effect. She has made a huge tactical blunder.
If she wants to counterpunch, she should be talking about the rampant corruption in the Trump administration, the disastrous effects of Trump’s policies, and Trump’s hypocrisy in hiring illegal immigrants to work in his hotels and golf courses. I hope at least some of the democratic candidates have the sense to point out how Trump’s vileness harms the public instead of just pointing out how vile he is personally.
We don't think she qualifies as Native American. She misrepresented herself. I have some small amount of middle eastern but I don't go around claiming to be Iranian.
2
Keep Warren in the Senate--not 2020 candidate! She lacks the appeal for 10% decisive undecideds and doesn't quite have the right comeback vibe to trumpster smearmeisters.
She should have said: "I am more genetically connected to Native Americans than The Donald is a successful businessman with 4 bankruptcies, money laundering corruptoion and dumb branding revenue. His ignorance of economics, history and science require no further evidence!"
3
With self-described liberals like Twila Barnes, it's no wonder that Democrats are so apt at snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. I like Elizabeth Warren, I like my fellow liberals less and less.
2
Informed people know that the concept of race is scientifically a a very general description, and that most genes that determine racial characteristics are present in the genome of all groups. It is their combinations that express them in different racial characteristics. For a blue eyed blonde woman to publicly claim she was part Native American, has to be political malpractice of the highest order. Trump, the more natural, albeit feral, politician, jumped all over that with his priceless Pocahontas slur. She is forever Pocahontas. If the Democrats run her and the they don't get back the Senate, Mitch will give us a 7-2 SCOTUS, with an average age of around 45 years.
Dear Liz, please don't be so careful and calculated in your handling of every potential issue and pitfall. It's what, imho, prevented HRC from running away with 2016. Be real, have humility, and a sense of humor, and be honest. Then turn back to focusing on what you came here to do. Sincerely, a fan.
1
I’m far less concerned about Warren’s native-American claims than I am about her apparently never having taken a course in economics. It’s downright scary what comes out of her mouth.
3
The Pocahontas issue isn’t her biggest problem, it’s her age. Biden, Bloomberg, Sanders and Warren are too old (as is Trump). It’s time for a new generation of Democrats to step up and that includes in the House of Representatives.
4
It's the old divide and conquer mentality that is apparent here. Enough.
Constant criticism of Warren for having some Native American ancestry is nuts. Many Americans do although they don't claim to be members of tribes, etc. It's her family's truth.
Some tribal members may be ticked off, but it shouldn't be at her.
3
Yes they should. She claimed privileges intended for people who suffered harms she never suffered.
Sure, lots of people claim to have a “Cherokee princess” in their past. The correct response to that is an eye roll, in the absence of proof. But claiming a preference for admission when you have never suffered the harm it is intended to address - that is wrong.
1
@E What privileges did she claim? She told her family story. End of story.
2
@Jill O - she ticked boxes on academic application forms. Anyone who has worked in academia knows why those boxes are there - so-called 'affirmative action'.
It too late now but she should have traded her DNA test for Trump's tax returns. She would then have the upper hand and would, probably, never had to release them.
2
Live and die by identity politics. Political opportunists are all leading contenders for the Democrats. Trump could not be happier; 2020 is shaping up with probably enough electoral votes.
2
I grew up believing I was of Polish and Italian extraction. I recently learned that my maternal grandmother was actually Austrian. It’s interesting but insignificant, as is the content of this article. Senator Warren’s words and deeds count far more in terms of what she can offer to us than her response to a Trumped up racist attack. I wish she did not engage in this nonsense, but since it happened, publications such as the NYT do a real disservice by prolonging the discussion.
It feels like the mistakes 2016 were not enough of a lesson.
2
I would prefer Sen Warren remain in the Senate and not run for President.
2
Women have the right to be heard and to defend their family's heritage. Warren has intelligence and guts, both of which we need in today's politics.
4
I will be the first to admit that I abhor giving credit to Trump for anything. But I must admit that his recklessness and mendacity has brought the definition of pure corruption into focus in ways heretofore not seen in our lifetimes--at least at the level of the presidency.
This new clarity he has brought to Americans everywhere make articles like this so baffling--what again, exactly, are we concerned about here?
Keep it simple: a child monarch can't handle criticism and therefore slings mud at Senator Warren. He thinks the mud sticks. But does it? Do average, normal Americans care less about this? I do not fault the Times as the record of history for such a thorough article to be read centuries from now. I do fault the Times for the article having such a pall over her bid for the presidency.
It's ludicrous. The American people can read tenacity and commitment in a person's actions. And Senator Warren shows us who she is everyday through her strong actions.
She verified a family story to put Trump's accusations to bed. Now, let those sleeping dogs lie, move on, and take the White House. She can win based on her truth and grit--easily.
4
Frankly, I'm more distressed that the media (including YOU, NYT!) aren't concentrating more on Trump's refusal to pay off his million dollar bet to her. Sen. Warren designated the bet money to go to help abused native women - how about letting your readers know how much Trump's money - had he paid it - might have helped?
The big scandal is Trump's reneging on his bet.
6
The Times seems to be trying to tell me that this is an issue, but frankly I am completely unconvinced. This is entirely the type of non-controversy that Fox News peddles, and I do not believe it is worth Elizabeth Warren’s (or the Democratic electorate’s) time of day to think about.
That said, I do agree that the lesson to learn here is “Do not engage in Trumps bully tactics!”
2
My family emigrated to Brooklyn NY from Ellis Island
2
You would of thought she had learned a lesson from the Trumpian/Republican demonization of Hillary. Apparently she has not, and now I lose a possible candidate for 2020.
1
ATICLE: Ms. Barnes said Ms. Warren had an opportunity to teach the broader public about how genetic testing has historically been used as a weapon against Native communities, but instead she “helped perpetuate a very dangerous idea.”
"Historically"????
Genetic testing only goes back a few years.
And how, exactly, has genetic testing been used as a weapon against Native communities?
1
Elizabeth Warren was not raised Indian, did not suffer those disadvantages. So to list herself as a minority in the Harvard Law School directory was at best silly, at worst resume fluffing for personal advantage. Had she owned up to this, there's a chance she could have killed this as an issue. But she didn't. She's a great senator. Let's find someone else who can be a great president.
7
Senator Warren is a "traditional" politician - meaning, she will get caught up in "traditional politician problems."
Fudging ethnicity to gain an advantage - whether that advantage was real, perceived or otherwise - just isn't going over well with people. And this DNA thing didn't help *at all.*
After the e-mail and fundraising taint that followed Hillary Clinton around, I wonder if we might be able to do better.
74
@Chris
This argument is based on several dishonest premises.
Shame on you!
And Democrats, don't buy into opposition messaging.
16
@Chris
Except she didn't lie. That's just another piece of right-wing propaganda, just like the imaginary "scandal" over Clinton's emails.
18
@Chris Do better? Do you discount her entire history in congress, as Senator, fighting for the middle class and taking on the corporate powers in an eloquent manner? So "emails" disqualified Hillary, an incredibly intelligent and competent politician, and gave us Trump.
Sometimes I think it's impossible for good people to be elected because of gross stupidity.
20
As someone who happily voted for Elizabeth Warren for the U.S. Senate, here in MASS, I am perfectly fine with her taking that DNA test, as she had been accused for many years of misrepresenting her ancestry at Harvard. The results of the test prove that she was truthful when she stated that she had Native American ancestors. That is the most important thing about this entire issue. It demonstrates that Senator Warren was truthful in the past, and I am very confident that she remains truthful in the present.
She is one of the best communicators on the public stage today....she is also one of the smartest Senators in Washington.....she cares deeply about ALL Americans and she fights hard to make sure that the poor and middle class citizens of this country are given every opportunity to succeed and thrive, as they struggle to survive in this often unjust world.
Thank you Senator Warren, for being such an outstanding and compassionate Public Servant.
9
The Republicans are the party of white, male supremacy; that’s their underlying credo. They will aways try to demonize powerful Democratic women, as they have done for decades with Nancy Pelosi.
Yes, Elizabeth Warren made a mistake playing into their game. But those on the left trying to make a big ideal out of this are no less to blame. They are also doing the Trumplicans’ dirty work for them.
The Trumplicans’ are engaged in a slow-rolling coup, a long-term, strategic effort to supplant democracy as we know it with single-party, autocratic rule. When they have filled enough judgeships with party hacks, they will take some excuse, quite likely of an environmental catastrophe, to declare marshal law. That will be the end of democracy as we know it.
In the face of this existential threat, the continuing nursing of identity grievances among activists on the left is unforgivable. To signify their rejection of Trumplicanism and all it stands for, those big egos should now take a step back and rally around their great senator, Elizabeth Warren.
3
No, Elizabeth Warren should not apologize for trying to find out more about her heritage. And no, her identification as Native American was never simply about the genetic component, and was rooted in a story of her parents having to elope because of her mother's Native American heritage.
Native Americans are being petty and picky when they choose to deny or discount Warren's narrative, which is also part of the Native American experience - assimilation into the larger population. Warren has not taken anything away from t he Native Americans, she has expressed solidarity.
Her ties to her Native American ancestry are no more presumptuous than other people's pride at being descendants of the Mayflower voyagers, or Revolutionary war figures - her connection no more distant than those who are related to Thomas Jefferson, and who continue to gather to this day.
The primaries can determine whether or not Elizabeth Warren has the broad appeal. I think she does. Her roots are in Oklahoma working class Republicans, and her constant focus on the working class - which was also her life's work makes her unique among Democrats. Along with her gift for teaching.
I hope she runs. I love her for never being complacent about Trump, about the tax cuts, about corporate greed. We need Warren to run.
6
I have been thrilled with Warren as a Senator, but hope I don't have to vote for her for president. She did not even consider supporting Bernie Sanders in 2016, though he has virtually her own platform, and needed people like her if he was to become the DP nominee. Sanders came close, but Warren led the fight for Hillary Clinton, who has almost nothing of her, Warren's, platform. After that, I haven't felt I could trust Warren to actually believe what she says she believes.
2
@Martha Stephens
You are wrong on the facts.
Elizabeth Warren did not endorse Hillary Clinton until it was clear that Bernie could not win.
This controversy would make sense only if Senator Warren had claimed tribal membership rights or sought personal advantage from her Native American ancestry. She did no such thing. She has a family history, proven true by a scientifically valid test. We should be celebrating the diverse, and mixed, heritage of us all. I'm thrilled that Senator Warren has even a thin line of ancestors who were not post-1492 immigrants.
15
Don't forget her Pow Wow Chow recipes that she borrowed from the NY Times' Pierre Franey back in early 80's.
9
Why is this important again?
9
Reading these comments, I am astonished to learn that there are people in the world who think The New York Times is mean to left-wing candidates.
10
What will the next shiny, distracting object be?
Alien abduction - say, there’s an idea!
5
Elizabeth Warren misunderstands. The problem is not that she claims that an ancestor was an American Indian. The problem is that she has claimed, and still claims, that she is an American Indian. She's not.
American Indians face many problems. Elizabeth Warren has faced none of them. Her claiming to be an American Indian is a Pocahontas, "Indian princess" fantasy and a disgrace.
15
@John Smithson Native folks understand very well the distinction between native ancestry and tribal membership -- as indicated among other things by those who are quoted in this piece. Prof. Warren has never claimed tribal membership, nor has she claimed that she has faced all of the problems of Native American identity writ large.
As articulated in her video, however, her family history has been colored by anti-Native bias, including her paternal grandparents' anti-Native bias against her mother. Asking Prof. Warren to deny that history is not the solution to the "many problems" you say face Native Americans.
3
@John Smithson Oh, please. Warren never claimed to be an American Indian. But right wingers say so in order to pretend that they call her "Pocahontas" out of the defense of American Indian identity. What's the next hypocrisy, saying that the nickname "Little Marco" is meant to defend Little People and that "Lying Hillary" was because Trump is a huge fan of telling the truth?
1
@Matt American Indian identity is complicated, with even many American Indians having different views. But Elizabeth Warren has claimed to be a woman of color, a minority, and an American Indian at different times and places. That's the issue.
Elizabeth Warren's mother may have faced hostility because of her imagined race. There is no evidence that anyone has ever discriminated against Elizabeth Warren because of her race. That she claimed American Indian status to gain privilege and stature is fraud, in my view.
1
Oh but her emails! now turns into Oh but her DNA test!
20
@Cam
In other words: Lies are not a problem when they are told by Democrats.
1
@GMooG Nope. There is zero evidence that Warren lied about anything. Focusing on utterly irrevelant issues and making them into some kind of moral litmus test is the problem.
1
Should have punched back on BLOTUS instead of trying to prove her ancestry. If you can find a viable Democrat who knows how to street fight you'd have a guaranteed winner for 2020. They all lack the skills need to take down the demagogic bully in the WH.
1
I don’t care about her ancestry...seriously! Our country is in a very unstable period with an inept man in the Oval Office who has unleashed and promoted violence against our free press. We have a trade war that has had disastrous ramifications for our economy and our 401 k’s. Republicans in Wisconsin and Michigan are doing coups to strip away their voter’s rights ... this is what they do in third world countries. Trump is going after food stamps to build his wall and there’s the fact, republicans are going after Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid to fill their astronomical deficit caused by their rich tax cuts. Sooo, Elizabeth Warren’s ancestry is nothing but fodder for reality TV or for those who watch Fox News and the “rich Housewife shows “ . We need to put our focus on getting rid of the Democracy killing “ Citizens United “ ruling not Warren’s Native American ancestry ... jeebus !
6
Have I got this right? A Democrat, who tells the truth, and backs it up with definitive, scientific evidence... is ‘in trouble’... for being truthful...
While... the Birther in Chief, AND his family/staff/administration, AND the GOP... go around lying through their teeth (provably! publicly! in many cases, by their own public admission!) stealing, betraying, defrauding, destroying, undermining, thieving, bribing, corrupting... EVERYTHING they can lay their grubby mobster paws on...?
We are in the grip of a death cult. Apparently the NYTimes is happy to serve up their Kool-Aid.
18
I would vote for her whatever her ancestry is.
She has more common sense than pretty much anyone else out there and she has the guts to stand up to a bully like our current fraud of a President.
16
Here's a flash: TRUMP IS A BULLY. He is bullying Warren now that her DNA results confirm her family's tales of Native American ancestry. But he bullied Warren before the test too, and would still be bullying her if she had not had the test done. He is a bully, and that's what bullies do.
BTW here's the score:
– Warren claimed to have Native American ancestry, and her DNA test shows that to be true.
– Trump claimed to have Swedish ancestry, but that was a lie.
https://www.history.com/news/donald-trump-father-mother-ancestry
So who should be impugned about their ancestry?
5
Are we serious with this? Who cares? DJT is president! There's the problem. Not some DNA test.
18
This story by and large misses the point.
Trump's stupid use of Pocahontas as a pejorative was not primarily because he is an ignorant racist, although that too.
He and his conservative friends think the world is inundated with "minorities" who use race to gain advantage through affirmative action or other diversity programs. I don't think he or they particularly care whether she has Native ancestry or not. They claim that she used her distant connection to Native ancestry as a means of gaining advantage in admission and advancing her career. Of course that's not true, but truth has no seat at the Trump table.
Warren's DNA test was a monumental error in that it reinforces the narrative that she wanted to identify a small slice of her biological profile as a means of advancing her own interests. That's not true either, I suppose, but it is the narrative that prevails. I think it will be enough to derail her presidential aspirations, which is very sad indeed.
4
Thank you. This is the most astute comment over read on this thread.
Senator Warren is brilliant and impassioned and I support her.
Her response to Trump, however, was asinine.
1
Senator Warren, please do not run for president. I respect your work as a senator both representing my state, and nationally advocating for key progressive causes. You are a champion, from creating and defending the Consumer Protection Financial Bureau (see https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/12/03/trump-cfpb-elizabeth-warren-215997) to shedding light on the student loan industry debacle, etc. Staying with those concerns, you stay grounded to the masses. Yet your DNA test and the issue of heritage plays right into Trump's hands, and native people have good reason to disdain what you've done. Please listen to the voices here. Drop your ego and don't run. Keep on keepin' on as an advocate and pit bull. You win the nomination and Trump wins in 2020. To be totally clear.
7
She makes identity politics look even worse.
20
As is often the case, the left is allowing the right to dictate their narrative. Sen Warren is not worried and if she isn't, neither should anyone else.
21
This "controversy" is much ado about nothing, but so were many of the "controversies" that were launched at Hillary Clinton by Republicans over the decades and some of which were picked up by Bernie or Busters in the 2016 campaign. Republicans are experts in exploiting things like this with their right wing propaganda machine.
I support Senator Warren in her efforts as a Senator, but I think she would be disastrous for Democrats as a Presidential candidate.
16
Elizabeth Warren should be proud of her years of public service and all she has achieved personally (and for her constituents). I would vote for her over Trump in a heartbeat. That said, she is not the answer the Democrats are looking for. A better version of Nancy Pelosi and Hillary Clinton is still not a recipe for victory in 2020.
I hope the Democrats don't try to out-Trump Trump with identity politics of their own. Touting one's level of oppression (ethnicity, race, gender, sexual identity, poverty, etc.) might score points in Liberal circles but it won't win the White House back. Identity politics by definition excludes others. Trump loves it. We should reject it.
Actually winning the election needs to happen before Democrats can start making progress on the environment, education, and economy. And social (in)justice issues can't be addressed if you lose in 2020.
8
This isn't controversial at all. Don't be lame, people.
9
@X
Yes, of course. There must be some other reason (beside controversy) why the article is on the front page of the Times and has 1300 comments already.
I really hope the DNC stands by her as she is the most qualified and intelligent of the frontrunners. And the country needs a minority woman of color as president. It's time.
3
@Yacine I hope The DNC stands by every candidate who runs for the presidential nomination in 2020. I hope they don’t pre-select the candidate and fail to give equal support to he others as they did in 2016. I hope they throw the superdelegates in he trash can and let the voters decide the candidate. As for the rest of your comment, a minoriy woman of color? Is that supposed to be Warren, sarcasm or what?
1
It has been asinine for Warren to pursue her ancestry, drawing endless attention to her having used a false claim to her benefit. Surely Harvard never intended someone as pale white as Warren to benefit from minority ancestry.
Her claiming native American ancestry is an embarrassment, but a minor one---people do anything possible to gain admittance to the college of their choice, or on their resume to gain a job position. We are human. But to angrily continue with this to try to win an argument is foolish, and does reflect on her ability, or lack of ability, to compromise and lead. Yes, Trump certainly lacks the same qualities, but we don't need another of the same.
Warren has many good ideas on economics, but she lost me when she decided not to endorse Bernie Sanders--with whom she shares numerous positions from Wall Street down--and decided to endorse based on gender. She endorsed Hillary, who is her gender, but also her polar opposite concerning Wall Street and economics.
If anger and gender politics are her forte, I'm afraid that she will not excite many in a presidential attempt, my liberal self included.
6
@Billy from Brooklyn
I think you misunderstand the context in which Prof. Warren has "claimed" (as you say) Native ancestry. She never did so in a context that did or could have advanced her career. She listed herself in a law professor directory as Native American in hopes (she has said) of connecting with peers with Native ancestry. Whether or not that was misguided, many of us are excited about exploring ancestry and family history (even aspects that represent a small percentage of our heredity and a small contribution to our heritage) -- and it should be an embarrassment to no one to seek to explore these corners of our past.
1
@Billy from Brooklyn
Elizabeth Warren publically endorsed Hillary after she became the nominee, I'm sure she would have endorsed Bernie if he had won too. Even in her endorsement of Hillary Warren took time to thank Bernie for bringing important issues to the mainstream democratic party. You don't have to agree with a candidate on every single issue to endorse them, you're just saying they're a solid candidate who should win over the opposition. Your assertion that any time a woman endorses another woman it must be based on gender is offensive. Would you say the same about a man who happens to endorse a man?
I must be a minority of one. I think Sen Warren made the absolutely correct decision in showing that she had Native American ancestry. A failure to do so in light of Trump's taunts would have continued to be a disaster.
My larger concerns are two fold. First, did she suddenly become a "Native American" out of nowhere for Affirmative Action preference? If so, shame on her. Second, she is so far Left that Trump will beat her. The Dems have yet to learn that the votes they need are in the Center, not on the Far Left
8
@Cranston Snord
To answer your first question, no, Prof. Warren never received a hiring or admission preference in connection with her heritage. It was never even disclosed in her hiring process at any of the institutions where she has worked.
1
This is the sort of outcry that gives liberals a bad name. Being sensitive to every perceived slight diminishes the impact of justifiable outrage when there is some serious racism that needs crushing - and these days we are surely seeing some. In the process it also stimulates white nationalism. Identity politics has been a disaster for the entire nation and should be abandoned. It is not the way to defeat bigotry, and it plays right into Trump's hands.
All Senator Warren did was set the record straight by providing facts. This is in my opinion on a par with President Obama releasing his birth certificate. That both were responses to Trumpian nonsense is no surprise. For Democrats, going with facts is a good strategy in this day and age. Trump ultimately will not be able to stand up to good old Joe Friday. Just the facts...
9
@Bob23
I've heard the term "identity politics" thrown around every time someone calls out racist or sexist behavior. How are we supposed to progress on these fronts if we're not allowed to talk about it? I agree that a candidate should not run on a platform of "vote for me because I'm X minority", but I've never seen that done.
Well, it’s good to see that the NYT has learned absolutely nothing from the 2016 election.
1. Trump focuses on something ridiculous about his opponent.
2. Media intensely focuses on the ridiculous thing, acknowledging that that the thing is ridiculous, but adds weight to it by digging out minor details about ridiculous thing.
3. Public starts to focus on the ridiculous thing. Media continues to pump out stories about public’s reaction to ridiculous thing, marveling at Trump’s diabolical ability to shape the narrative.
Even now, every major publication defends their breathless coverage of Clinton’s emails, even though they acknowledge in the abstract that media failed to convey their significance, which was zero.
Warren said her ancestry was part of her family lore. She took a DNA test, which I happen to think was a mistake, but fine. That should be the end of it. STOP MAKING IT A STORY under the rubric that everyone else is worried about it becoming a story, and for some reason you need to cover that worry. Talk about policy. Not Obama’s birth certificate. Not Obama’s college transcripts. Not Hillary’s emails. And not Warren’s heritage.
Talk about their qualifications, their legislation, and their policies.
24
@Mercury S
Big +1. Why are we talking about this again? Because Native groups don't like Warren? Hint: They never liked her before she took the DNA test. She's not a tribal citizen; she doesn't focus on Native issues. Those groups also have zero influence on national elections, so it is a bit rich to make them a focus of a story about political fallout.
I love Warren's policies but I hope she stays out of the 2020 race. If democrats want a fighting chance at beating Trump, they need to put up a candidate who will swing moderates - and Warren is not that candidate. I understand the appeal to idealism; that democrats shouldn't "settle" and should put up the candidate they believe most aligns with their far-left policies, but they need to win more than they need to be perfect.
It's a shame to say this but I don't think anyone other than an old white guy is going to win the 2020 election against an extremely energized Trump "fan" base. I thought the same thing in 2016 and was extremely disappointed to see Clinton as the pick because I knew in my gut that she was too controversial to win over moderates (whether or not she deserved the controversy, I don't think she did). If democrats won't sink to the GOP's lows in order to win, they need to at least be extremely pragmatic.
8
If Ms. Warren really believed in transparency, she would've taken that DNA test when she ran for Senator.
6
I think the United States has gone slightly insane, pushed over the edge by Trump.
319
@joyce
Way more than “slightly.”
9
@joyce
I agree, except for the qualification "slightly."
8
@joyce You're absolutely right. Warren is a smart smart woman with a history of adopting and working hard for worthy causes, on the right side of issues that affect very many unwealthy (most of us) Americans.
The contrast between her and HRC is overwhelming.
13
Well, from Sen. Warren's POV it sure beats discussing issues. For her stance on issues, we have to wait for Sen. Warren's latest book deal.
Those book deals are the current way corporations bribe sitting elected officials.
It's a bottom-line issue for me. Sign a big corporate book deal (or two or three)? You never get my vote.
https://emcphd.wordpress.com
8
I'm going to quote my daughter who just got an A for a paper at Columbia.
"When evidence is developed and clear-cut, but journalists present opposing views as more equal than evidence allows, false balance occurs."
For anyone who had been paying attention, or took the time to google it, the false narrative that Warren is trying to claim to be a native is an obvious smear. I assume that NYT reporters pay attention, that they know already that Warren was responding to the false propaganda targeting her that claimed she was lying about being a minority. What a news organization concerned with facts should have done was report Warren's repeated motive for the DNA test and refute the falsehoods coming from enemies with the facts. Instead we get "he said/she said balance". Warren's own words, which there's no obvious reason to doubt, are lost in the invective.
This is a tragedy because Warren is the most effective leader we have for consumer protections. This has earned her a big bullseye on her back from powerful financial interests. The "outcry" from her DNA is obvious political partisanship. NYT just demonstrated why they do it. It works.
41
This is rather enjoyable and clever commentary watching fanatics eat each other. First, we have the cultural appropriator in Chief (pardon the pun) in Sen. Warren, then we have everyone either angry at her or angry at people angry because that’s misogyny or perhaps racist.
Personally, I think everyone should be angry because it’s all a social construct of a racist non-binary unit inhibited by misogyny disguised as education. Not to mention, it's all Trump's fault.
4
Absolutely infuriating that the NYT, academics and culture leaders insist on conflating genetics and culture. Trump repeatedly indicated that Warren's claim of Native American ancestry was false. But Warren's careful DNA test stated she has a bit of Native American ancestry. She has claimed nothing beyond the DNA results. In fact, DNA says nothing about culture, end of story. Informed commentary should insist on that fact first and foremost. Commentary that does not is, at best, uninformed.
12
Too bad. She was a good advocate. I think as an advocate she was always going to be better as a Senator or similar role, not as executive. And she has shown in poor decision making with this controversy. I don't think she can win the presidency----this has become Benghazi or Emails.
As a Liberal we can't have it both ways however. If Tribes are upset with her for being offensive we have to acknowledge it just as Trump is (much more so) offensive by labeling her derogatorily.
4
The fact that Trump has continually gone after Elizabeth Warren is proof that she is 100% effective in getting on his nerves and hitting him where it hurts. And as always, Trump travels the low road.
Warren has done very well with ridicule, backed up with facts. For a vain glorious megalomaniac like Trump, ridicule is a great weapon.
4
It's not a career killer. She can be Senator forever, Governor, even. But she can never be President. To fail to see that is to be blind.
10
@krnewman I fail to see why she can never be President. Guess I'm blind. :)
2
A totally manufactured nothing burger "controversy". Her family lore said some distant "Indian" ancestry - true or not that's what she was told and it's no one else's business. She had a DNA test run and it suggests some distant "Indian" ancestry - if test was valid the result is true. Neither family lore nor DNA make her either a valid official tribe member or culturally an "Indian" - she claims neither. Personal point 1) I have not had DNA run, 2) I have 100% documented "Indian" ancestry; 3) I'm proud of that ancestry but do not claim tribal membership or practice "Indian" culture. Folks on BOTH side of this controversy need to get a life and move on.
12
She said she had native american ancestry. She does. What on earth does she need to apologize for, and why is anyone upset about this??? The mind boggles at the irrelevancy of it all...
11
@michele Agreed!
Elizabeth Warren's decision to release her DNA test was just plain stupid. And extremely disappointing. I don't understand how someone who otherwise comes across as so well-spoken and thoughtful could have thought that this was at all a good decision. To me, as a progressive, it demonstrates that she is not the candidate to stand up to Trump, as her action was very much dictated by a giving-in to a ridiculous narrative that he created. Had she not done this -- no one would be talking about, or caring about, the native american claim she made. The DNA results she published, in my opinion, only serve to fuel more Trump comments regarding the issue and made it look like, to someone like myself, that she is going to lower herself to responding to Trump's name-calling and hyperbole that should otherwise be ignored.
3
As a conservative I am somewhat surprised how blind some Democrats seem to be about Warren. She is an elitist who lied about her ancestry to get a leg up in life - this story is clear to the average voter. When you have authentic candidates on the Left to choose from, why in the world would you support such an obvious phony?
11
@Chris
Railing against the establishment (ex., GOP) prevents them from having to look objectively at issues. Easier to trash/blame Trump than to assess Warren's poor judgment.
It was a lie, but did she know it was a lie or not? That she was willing to take advantage of the situation make me concerned about what else she would take advantage of.
I'm more likely to support someone who earned their access to elite schools.
Who has the DNC been grooming?
I think she should just laugh and describe the criticism as silly and not worthy of a reply.
5
My Iowa political consultant friend says Warren is doomed because she can’t compete on the Iowa caucuses and would have to spend a few days campaigning in Pocahontas county.
6
Reading the comments, people seem very confused about this issue. It doesn’t matter that you, personally, “don’t care” about the test/issue, or that you don’t understand it’s relevance.
It’s relevabt because she is currently protected by a highly partisan news media. The minute she throws her hat in the ring, however, there is no way to stop her opponents, whether in the primary or general, from lambasting her for listing herself as a “minority” in the Harvard Law directory for over a decade.
Then she inexplicably released a generic test showing she had a range of slightly less to very slightly more Native American DNA than your average Caucasian American.
Therefore, she was claiming to be a “minority” due to a very slight amount of DNA shared in roughly equal proportion by the, uh, majority population. Instead of even entertaining the possibility that she was out of place to do so, she’s chosen to double and triple down. (Very Trumpian, actually.)
It doesn’t matter if it’s a problem for you personally or not. Her opponents are going to make it a problem for her, which is the reason for all his silliness.
9
@John She wasn't "claiming" to be anything than who she is.
2
That is not what the test said at all.
2
With regard to 2020 only ONE question matters.
Can she persuade swing voters in key swing states to vote for her in 2020?
That's it.
Some reporting on policy ideas would be nice.
The rest of this is irrelevant. The Times can try to stir things up all it wants and MAKE news instead of report it. Or they can focus on what matters.
Which will it be?
5
Elizabeth Warren does not excite me in the least — not that "excitement" is a requirement for me to vote. But, I am a black woman; and, well, Elizabeth Warren reminds me of all the other "woke" white women who chuck casual racism in my face, day in and out.
I tell ya, as a black voter, I'm super disillusioned by both parties at this point. It feels like being trapped.
6
Could you please give a fact based example of how Warren has “chucked casual racism” in your face?
@Martin - This is the question of someone who has refused to learn about implicit bias and how it affects socio-political realities for people of color. My fact based example: my lived experience. Plus, you know I said that she reminds me of people who do. But keep going. White and Uncle Tom democrats forget that they need us to win elections -- and the more you pull this denial / dismissive tact, the more we will look for third party alternatives. You could say that's throwing away a vote, but at this point, the dems like you are no different than republicans when it comes to how they treat people of color. Why not embrace some third party radical.
This is an issue because the media is making it an issue. Please, NYT, prioritize the real issues, the real scandals that Warren is trying to address.
3
Who cares if she's half Pawnee and half Pony?
Does she do a good job? Does she stand for what's right? Is she a criminal? That's what matters.
This is one of the stupidest “controversies” I’ve encountered. She has family lore of some Native American background. Trump makes a big deal about it like he did wielding his birtherism nonsense with Obama. She takes a DNA test that does verify that the family history is valid. The granularity of the tests will not show much more than that - certainly not tribal affiliations. That should have been end of the story. These DNA tests show markers of that heritage but it is at the 30,000 mile level. This whole issue should be framed for what it really is about: Trump & his racism and his typical smears of his “opponents”. She is not the problem.
5
The NY Times is clearly trying to convince readers not to support a progressive like Warren.
The DNA test was a mistake. But her main message has always been an economic one, and the Times, as usual, is doing the bidding of the Establishment and the bankers who want to make sure her potential presidential campaign never gets off the ground.
6
Democrats need to find someone who will stand up to Trump and this proves she's not that someone. DNA test = Fatal Mistake!
2
Dumb Times political reporters, Please quit giving such a trivial issue such huge coverage.
Try to concentrate on topics that really matter to real people who vote - like what Elizabeth Warren recommends to counter global warming, what she things of the precipitous fall of the stock market and Donald Trump's trade policies.
Quit falling into the traps of the Republican public opinon manipulators. No one who really cares about the country cares about Elizabeth Warren's ethnic background or lack thereof.
4
This whole DNA announcement was a disaster
She came off as weak and defensive and a little weird all at the same time
11
"showed strong evidence that Ms. Warren has Native American pedigree “6-10 generations ago.”"
You forgot to mention that the "Native American pedigree" was found in DNA from Central our South America. Not North America. So, all those tales about Cherokee ancestry are disproved.
5
No, those are the only strains of DNA they had to compare hers to.
https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwjys8fX7ovfAhULMawKHQKpDqUQzPwBegQIARAC&url=https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/elizabeth-warren-dna-test-fact-check-native-american-ancestry-boston-globe-journalists-trump-a8595001.html&psig=AOvVaw1d3ZLPrLKcz2GM0R0COKjY&ust=1544208394051818
This is a trivial matter, especially compared to Trump's racial-baiting "birther" lie, his corruption, and possible criminal activity. And that he is probably the most horrible human on the planet.
Warren is tough and can take on the Very Stable Genius. It's time to start thinking of strategies to take him down if Mueller doesn't do it first.
1
Boomer generation women are dismissed whenever possible. Men have fought tooth and nail to keep some percentage of their fathers' spoils. Any woman who is not poised and properly breasted is just another someone trying "get in". It is a constant revolting show of manhood. Whether or not she is a good or the best candidate it is this desire to find any puny reason to make sure that she get back, way back. It stinks.
2
She's out I say. Trump ruined her already. I'm sure this sounds sexist but let's not put a woman against him this time. Like previous posts have stated, Hillary was easily the most qualified candidate and still lost.
2
Get over it folks! Trump and his base are bullies. They do their work – bullying – regardless of facts.
Now, can we please focus on the issues? Trump and the Republicans have been driving the U.S. into the ground. We must salvage what we can while this despicable man is in the White House, and while the Republicans still hold the Hose of Representatives.
2
Talk about cutting your nose off to spite your face. Twila Barnes’ vow to vote Trump in a Warren/Trump election is an even poorer choice than Elizabeth Warren publishing the results of her DNA test.
1
@AJ Michel
Hillary didn't realize she needed the country in-between the liberal coasts to win. She was out of touch. That's often why candidates lose. The candidate who can feign having the most in common with Americans will win.
The Media inflation of this type of non-issue is likely what may propel the Tangerine Terror to a second term.
Trump has probably committed a crime, almost everyday, for 20 years.
His misogyny, bigotry, xenophobia, ignorance, and White Nationalism don't phase the Media or his followers.
America deserves what it gets.
Sad!
1
This is another politically motivated media distraction to keep working people off balance. But you have to give credit where due.The propaganda agencies of the powers that be, including the NYT, are doing their level best to keep the people of this country from hitting the streets and hanging the elite from the lampposts.
1
If she’s naive in dealing with trump how will she do against the real smart foes like putin, et al.? Another failed wannabe.
8
Warren is a bully, so complaining about Trump being a bully is a hoot. No matter what her fellow progressives claim, she falsely held herself out as having Native American ancestry even though she clearly doesn't. Trying to spin her DNA test into proof she had some Native American Ancestry is just doubling down on a falsity. She got caught flatfooted doing whatever the Native American version of "blackfishing" is and all the spin in the world won't change that.
7
My heavens. What a tempest in a teapot.
Many families including my own have apocryphal stories about native American ancestry. And we wear those badges with pride.
I agree, Ms Warren should have never engaged the fool in the White House. Like all bullies he shouts loud and long about worthless issues. And like all bullies he has followers who hear that siren call.
For the rest of us, who cares. I don't.
We've gone from racial insensitively to racial insanity.
And guess what? Race IS determined by your genes. Anything else is ethnicity. There are facts and wishful fantasies.
The point is who cares? I know I don't. When my father, who was born in Missouri and has a very common surname shared with many Africans Americans found out he had no African American blood, he was a bit disappointed. If an 80 year old white man born and raised in the South can take that position, we all need to grow up and stop acting like children.
4
The right wing propagandists would disqualify Elizabeth Warren for the presidency if she were to wear two different colored socks to bed at night. Enough of this nonsense. The debt is piling up, the planet is warming up, and our president may be a traitor.
Remember FDR’s approach to these personal attacks: "They are unanimous in their hate for me — and I welcome their hatred." That opens the door to discuss why they really hate you, and it’s not about your socks.
4
Elizabeth Warren’s elevation of a single, remote ancestor as central to her racial/ethnic identity strikes me as deeply problematic. She’s confirmed that she has trace amounts of Native American ancestry, yet for her (and many others just like her) this is somehow dominant in her sense of self.
This is just as wrong as self-identified whites who disavow their non-white ancestry as “junk DNA,” and self-identified blacks who’ve embraced the “one-drop rule.”
If you are of mixed heritage, as many Americans are, embrace it. But embrace your heritage as it exists, not as you imagine you should be.
6
@Jon That's exactly what she did
The New York Times was against Bernie Sander's candidacy and today is against Elizabeth Warren's candidacy because they promote financial regulations and reigning in the billionaire class. Such a thing as eliminating Chuck Schumer's beloved carried interest loophole is anathema to NYC's source of tax revenues, "financial services."
Following the money takes us straight through New York City. Any policy that constrains the flow is Dead On Arrival for NYT.
Similarly, any policy such as the Iraq war gets Judith Miller's banner headlines. The Arms Of Krupp were profitable.
5
If not for the DNA controversy, her denigrators would surely have come up with some other non-issue with which to smear her.
3
--
But Her DNA?
Nate Silver is correct, the NYT and the political press in general are biased against Warren and the DNA test is their bludgeon instead of a highly over-dramatized EMAIL fetish.
It is all so hateful - and petty.
--
3
Ms. Warren thought by announcing her DNA heritage that it would be a feather in her cap. Wrong
6
She's been a joke in Trumpland for the last 3 years. And she's part of the fault. She handled her claim very badly. She has no shot for various reason but Pocahontas is one of them.
5
Am I the only one who finds this "a tempest in a teapot? "
The real scandal here is all the uber liberals running around like headless chickens in stead of using this to mock Trump.
4
So she has very little Native American DNA—the Native American tribal elders who reject her do more damage to themselves than they know. She has been so proud of her family history and her connection to Native Americans, and has been steadfast in her support of them, their issues and needs.
My husband’s family also always thought they had Native American blood. He did a DNA test recently and found that he has no Native American DNA but he has some West African DNA. In an earlier time, that would have made him officially “colored.” Why doesn’t the same amount of Native American DNA allow Elizabeth Warren to claim a genetic connection to Native Americans? And how stupid of the Native Americans not to welcome her into their tribal family?
201
@Pkdessler She has not experienced any of what they have experienced, and she has not lived their culture. I hate it when the concept of cultural appropriation is thrown around lightly, but if there ever was an example, this is it!
12
@Pkdessler Ms. Warren took advantage of her self-identified Native American status to displace a genuine Native American who might have been hired by Harvard Law School to increase its racial diversity.
She says she is a Cherokee and incorrectly claims that her DNA test proves it; however, DNA testing is in its infancy and cannot currently distinguish among Native American (or African or Asian) tribes.
6
@Pkdessler Are you seriously advocating for a return to the "one drop rule"? Yikes!
7
For the same reasons I was astonished that Barack Obama provided his Hawaii birth certificate to quell Trump's birther claims, I wondered why Ms. Warren capitulated to Trump, as if he and his tiny-brained rally thugs would be satisfied with facts.
But the right-wing meda gasbags who demolished Howard Dean over a victory whoop on the campaign trail, and who created the infamous and ficticious conspiracy theory of the swiftboat debacle against John Kerry, will continue to pounce on Ms. Warren over her DNA test.
She took the poisonous bait and with it, the probable end to any 2020 aspirations. for POTUS. And make no mistake about it, owing to her expertise in banking and credit law — which she taught at Harvard — Wall Street's goon squads will spend vast sums of money to keep her out of the Oval Office. She's already had them sweating bullets for years since she cannot be fooled by their lies and diversions. They know she knows where the proverbial bodies are buried.
I am sorry various tribal leaders and representatives got sick and nervous about her DNA. However, they better wrap their heads around the truth that Elizabeth Warren remains a steadfast advocate for the rights — and needs — of all Native Americans.
At a time when America must rid itself of the intolerant, hatefilled and petulent baby boy now occupying the WH, this is no time for Native Americans to emulate thin-skinned right-wingers. That is a recipe for losing in 2020. It's reality-check time, people.
10
How, how, how many times are we going to let Republicans do this? Can we never learn? The press needs to grow a brain and stop covering this story like it is a real thing.
The worst, though, is liberals who fall for this propaganda technique against their own candidates, over and over and over, like we were just born yesterday.
18
I love Elizabeth Warren, but not as the POTUS. She is a gifted a fierce Senator and would be likewise brilliant in any citizen advocacy role. I never understood why Obama failed to appoint her to the Consumer Protection agency (which is now being eviscerated by the current POTUS).
I hope she does not run. If the Democrats learned anything from the 16 election, it is that part of the Voldemort success was enabled by the 3-ring circus of 16 candidates demonstrating what imbeciles they were, so why not pick a clown... Voldemort will laugh all the way to re-election if the Dems do the same thing in 2020!
5
The idea of 'Racial Science" is abhorrent. The very term is toxic. It is an enormity, both oxymoronic and moronic.
Racial Science. What a deplorable dyad. Shall we resurrect phrenology, astrology, and eugenics while we are at it? Is there no end to the barbarism?
Washing out your mouth with strong soap is strongly recommended, followed by ilberal lathering of your writing hand. Perhaps a lie-down with a damp cloth over your forehead to follow.
3
Who cares?
I'm also somewhat disappointed at the fact that the Times spends thousands of words on this and very few on the policy proposals by Warren to expand corporate governance to include employees.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/02/opinion/elizabeth-warren-2020-accountable-capitalism.html
"She has proposed a bill in the Senate — and Ben Ray Luján, a top House Democrat, will soon offer it there — that would require corporate boards to take into account the interests of customers, employees and communities. To make sure that happens, 40 percent of a company’s board seats would be elected by employees. Germany uses a version of this “shared-governance” model, mostly successfully. Even in today’s hypercompetitive economy, German corporations earn nice profits with a philosophy that looks more like William Benton’s than Gordon Gekko’s."
Wow!
I've been a real beneficiary of Capitalism, and I've also seen how destructive it can be. I've been waiting for years to hear any political leader in this country with the courage to look Capitalism in the face and see the many, many problems, and say so out loud.
I'm voting for Warren. Go Pocahontas!
Who cares about this other stuff, and why does it rise to the level of "news" in your paper over her policy proposals?
https://www.warren.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/warren-introduces-accountable-capitalism-act
10
I wish the Times would stop referring to some people as "Progressives" when they are merely Liberals. How can I trust the article to be nonpartisan?
2
@cleo There is a huge difference, Liberals were intelligent people who celebrated open-mindedness, free inquiry, and rational discussion of varying opinions. Modern progressives demand totalitarian orthodoxy, meet any dissent with insults, and abhor the values of western civilization and liberal democracy. To progressives, males are females, illegal immigrants are 'migrants', and race does not exist but Caucasians are the root of all evil.
1
Warren is a smart woman. Why doesn't she understand that being a 'minority' means having lived a life subject to the discrimination that minority status entails. It doesn't mean having one bit of minority DNA. She should apologise to native Americans for using them to (wrongly) secure an affirmative action job, & to all Americans for playing us for idiots. If it's Warren against Trump for president in 2020, I will vote for her -sadly. If she makes the apologies we are all owed, I will serve her campaign in any way I can.
5
@Jenifer Wolf you apparently don't know it's been proven multiple times that she *never* had an affirmative action job - nor did she ever use her family stories of native heritage to further her career right? Well documented. Use Google or something.
4
I agree that she didn't cheat or lie. But she got into this mess by thinking too much about herself and failing to do her homework on Indian issues. If only she weren't so naive.
@anuty05 Wrong! I read that she became a Harvard law professor as 'first native American in that position".
What a waste of time the DNA test was.. All she had to do was claim she "identifies" as a native american... a native american born into a white woman's body Then she would be ! problem solved...
5
Democrats please, substance, substance and more substance.
1
Seriously, NY Times? We’re going to do this again? How did your rampant misogynistic pieces on Hillary work out?
4
@Theresa Turner
misogynistic pieces on Hillary?
Hillary has gotten free ride after free ride for decades for being a woman and wife of.
While Warren was stupid for taking Trump's racist baiting, this is just yet another NY Times closet Republican hit job. And I have noticed that whenever the Times publishes articles critical of Republicans, it's no comments allowed; with Democrats it's open season. Frankly I and many other readers are getting sick of this veiled but blatant bias towards Democrats and Progressives.
Why don't you just sell the whole thing to Rupert Murdoch and be done with it?
@Ignatz Farquad You say "bias towards Democrats and Progressives". You mean "bias against Democrats and Progressives".
And if you think the New York Times has a veiled but blatant bias against Democrats and progressives, you are mistaken.
1
The Massachusetts bubble rises again. I have mostly fond memories of my two decades living there. One telling memory of which I am not so fond is realizing that not only was the State in favor of McGovern, certainly an able man, a very large number of the State’s inhabitants actually thought he would be elected. Didn’t work out, as I heard.
With respect to Warren, also able in many ways, memory should be our guide, and the bubble is a warning. Gaseous inflation appears to stem from unrestrained hope, not realistic assessment, nor even from optimism, a more realistic form of hope. The good people of Massachusetts need to get out more, maybe change their diet a bit.
1
Elizabeth Warren's DNA test seems to indicate that a marker in her biological ancestry establishes a connection to someone from roughly 100-200 years ago. Does this demonstrate a heritage? Does it mean she was accurate about her claim, if only technically? Does the DNA test prove damaging to a president who ridiculed her ancestry claim (but who otherwise rejects and politicizes science when it suits him), the same president who persisted in casting doubt on Barack Obama's legitimacy to be president until the "right" birth certificate was produced, the same president who deploys the contemporary rumpus over identity politics to deflect attention from more pressing issues facing his administration, this country, and the world?
Neither Obama nor Warren needed to prove anything to Donald Trump, the same Trump who spins the evidence of MBS's central role in the murder of Jamal Khashoggi, the same Trump who coddles authoritarian regimes around the world, the same Trump of astonishing and ultimately self-defeating chutzpah.
One thing is for sure: self-inflicted wounds are always the worst.
2
@Robert
"if only technically"? You mean like in the facts of the matter? The technicality here, as well as what Warren herself has said, as opposed to the words put in her mouth by Republican propagandists, is the truth.
2
I think people Democrats should calm down. There are lots of candidates for the Democratic nomination who will be vetted in the primary process. Yes, it has been easier for Republicans to demonize women than men. We have seen how well it has worked on Clinton, Pelosi, and Warren. Democrats can try to push back but ultimately each candidate male or female has to stand on their own. Pelosi is a good example of how a woman candidate can push back. She does it with her overwhelming skill and experience. In the end she will be Speaker and Democrats will be glad to have her as Speaker as she ties House Republicans in knots. Warren on the other hand made a bad blunder with the DNA test. She should have gotten better advice because she allowed herself to fall into the Republican narrative about her. She should have simply stated that her family story included discrimination because relatives believed she had native American ancestry. Her reaction to it was to take pride in the heritage that she was told she had by listing it. It probably also gave her a better understanding of how hurtful discrimination because of your ethnic background can be. The issue is not if a test with known shortcomings can “prove” much native American DNA she has. The issue is that Republicans like Trump are using raw racism to attack her. Why are they not being condemned for their overt racism?
1
@JS
Actually no. The test does not have known short comings. The statistics are solid. Confusion might have resulted from the reporters unnecessarily confusing the issues of race and ethnicity.
Perhaps we should rename my beloved Democratic Party the Black Widow Party. Again,we seek to eat our own. Trump's juvenile baiting worked and Senator Warren ham-handedly sought to settle the issue in her own favor. She is the last person I would expect to mishandle any aspect of human rights or representation as President.
I love Senator Warren as a senator, yet thoroughly wish that she would not run for President, as I believe that her perpetual outrage and yelling would not play well in a campaign. Even speaking as a progressive, this time around the Democrats need a reasonable, experienced moderate with broad appeal to win this most essential election and to have a chance to put Humpty Dumpty back together again.
2
Why is this being treated like a major crisis? Move on.
1
Unfortunately she has no chance. She should give it up.
4
All I know is I hope she never stops being my Senator: she is doing good work HERE. Why not stay?
Mass Native.
157
@Margot lane Does a DNA test support your claim of being a native??
@Margot lane. Great for you. Keep her and let the rest of us win in the end.
@Margot lane
Elizabeth Warren was not born in Massachusetts. I think she was born in Oklahoma. She was the daugher of a janitor and a home maker.
What she has been able to accomplish as an attorney, a law professor, a member of the Obama Administration responsible for creating the Consumer Protection Agency, and her first political campaign for Sentor from Massachusetts proves her merit as a politician, a person who understands American banking and credit, and a successful mother. The Republican attacks against her demonstrate her talent and the fact that she is probably the biggest threat to Republicans if she runs for president in 2020. All the petty sniping at her is a reflection of how we treat women in politics - concentrating on insignificant harping rather than considering her considerable merits and accomplishments. I think she has only begun to fight for what's right. She's capable of going the distance for president.
7
I'm sorry, but this is idiotic. Warren claimed to have Native American ancestry, not to belong to a tribe. He DNA result prove she had what she claimed, that's it. It says nothing about tribal politics or decision making about membership.
If Ms. Barnes really thinks that Warren's TRUTHFUL statement is so egregious that she'll sit out the election rather than vote for her against trump, a man who has no problem disempowering and oppressing the rights of Native Americans, then there's no hope.
Talk about cutting off your nose to spite your face.
11
@Reg
This article's mashing of the truth proves that Republican propagandists are correct to think that continued lying about Warren and her motives will be successful. The large target on her back is well paid for. The real reason this is occurring is because of her effective consumer advocacy.
3
Why is Warren's heritage pertinent?
I do not understand why this is even an issue.
No woman should run as the Dem candidate,
the US is still, sadly, not ready for a woman as POTUS.
5
@wc
She made it an issue.
3
This is an issue of no importance, but if it ruins her candidacy, it won't be the first time a political campaign has foundered because of an insignificant lapse in judgment. Remember Howard Dean and the undignified little scream that killed his presidential bid?
5
A scream which, when isolated, sounded horrid. Had the actual audio at the venue — with full crowd noise — been released it would have not become the scream heard ‘round the world.
3
Are people still taking her seriously as a presidential candidate? This is one of the rare cases where Trump has it right - she is a white woman pretending to be Native, and it's almost as creepy as Trump's need for fables to boost his ego.
7
As others here say, great senator but not presidential material. And let’s be clear: with trumpism still raging despite Trump’s obvious incompetency, racism, homophobia and misogyny and the clear, outright sexism of the last election, only a man (sadly probably should be white) should be the Democratic nominee. But that nominee can and absolutely should select a woman without baggage.
Reality is reality and until these raging incoherent old white men die off or are demographically overwhelmed, it’s a given that the electorate is not ready for a woman.
And please spare me the self-righteous “it was Hillary who I voted against, not a woman candidate”. No, you had TWO choices in our two party system as it is currently: Hillary or Trump. Your third party vote or no vote was a vote against the female candidate.
2
Elizabeth move on!
Now!
Today!
A. It does not matter
B. No one cares. Really!
This is not what leaders do.
Leaders dictate the topics of the day and do not get involved in childish he said she said arguments.
Leaders also understand timing and context and know when to drop a subject and not double down on it. (This is where DJT fails so miserably, he does not know to stop raising subjects that are packed with lies even when the outright lies are made available to him.)
With each passing day Senator Warren becomes less relevant and effective in battling the abuses of the current WH.
And did I mention, no one cares?!!
4
The press could help.
1
So I guess the press is going down the "emails" vortex again. How many self-flagellating think pieces ex post facto are going to be needed to restore democratic institutions this time?
As a Chinese American, I'd still like my descendants 8 or 20 generations down to know they have Chinese ancestors, even if everyone else from me going down isn't Chinese. I think this whole attack is ludicrous; Warren is being shamed for sharing her ancestry, not identifying as Native American.
7
Wall Street - the biggest corrupting influence in our government, hates her.
Not many like her to take on something like this.
7
The most extreme left fringe of my party is far smaller and less dangerous than the farthest right fringes of the GOP are today. It can though often be equally insane.
5
This article, and many comments, have the distinct smell of a political hit job.
Warren endured years of false smears that she used her distant, ancestral connection to native Americans for preferential, affirmative career advancement. Then the President of the United States began repeatedly insisting to large, televised audiences that she is a liar who easily could disprove him by a simple DNA test.
So the choice is: continue to endure false claims about making-up ancestry for preferential career advancement and false Presidential claims of being a liar or "take the test."
For me and, I suspect, for most people, the question for over a year was "why in the world doesn't she just take a DNA test; might she be worried about the results?"
So she took the test that proves she (and her grandmother) are truthful and transparent.
So what is the excuse for today's smears and diversions from the common sense policy goals she's had for decades?
Is anyone surprised that in these times, political opponents will claim that proving her truthfulness shows "terrible judgement? Unfortunately, no one should be surprised in these times that even the NYTs will give such no-way-to-satisfy smears a prominent, "serious" platform
11
Ms. Barnes will now vote for Mr. Trump rather than Ms Warren because she took a DNA test that confirmed she had some American Indian ancestry.
Another great example of cutting off your nose to spite your face - seems rather immature.
8
A simple checkbox (yes-or-no, check if yes) on a standard Harvard personnel questionnaire asked if the respondent had American Indian ancestry. It did not ask if respondent was an enrolled member of a tribe and it did not ask "how much."
If one's family lore maintains that great great great grandma was a squaw, to the extent even of assigning a known fraction of heritage (e.g. 1/4, 1/8, 1/16, 1/32) then it is most likely true. Official tribal enrollments originated in chaos. Many eligible people never got on the rolls. They do not pretend to contain the complete set.
Elizabeth's family tells her that she is 1/32 "indian" and her DNA agrees. All that means is that her DNA includes features already known to prevail in native Americans more than other ethnicities. There is no Indian gene. There is no caucasian gene or black African gene, only relatively greater incidences of certain known combinations of molecules in known places.
My family told me that I am 1/32, because my mothers parents told her that she was 1/16 because her father was 1/8. It is really that simple.
Neither Harvard not Warren got any advantage or preference for anything from that simple little data point.
A political opponent got a bit of free press for making something out of nothing, implying that she somehow cheated for lack of official enrollment.
102
Harvard listed her as a minority hire. Please.
14
Respectfully, I disagree that Sen. Warren didn’t know better. Anyone from Oklahoma—AKA “Indian Country—knows that family lore doesn’t mean anything. Unless your an enrolled member in a federally-recognized tribe, you aren’t considered Native.
The public needs to question the premise that she believed family lore is sufficient for claiming tribal identity, and that doing so was an honest, earnest mistake. Knowing the context of what Oklahomans know—that a tribal ID card is what matters—makes Sen. Warren’s “mistake” seem more like a willful obfuscation of the truth.
2
@Len
I covered the tribal recognition part adequately. The question was not about tribal identity; it was about "native American ancestry. Anyone with good reason to believe they are one /anythingth Indian can say so in answer to that question.
2
Time to recap: Warren's family history, as told by her family, includes tales of a Native American ancestor. Her DNA sample indicates that the family lore is true.
BTW Trump tauntingly used the epithet "Pocahontas" to refer to Warren, challenged her to take a DNA test, and boasted that he would pay her $1 million if it showed Native American ancestry. So far, no payment made.
Trump is notoriously bad at sussing out other politicians' family history. Warren has not been his only target; he claimed that Obama was not born an American citizen, and therefore did not qualify to be president of the U.S.
Trump has also claimed to have Swedish ancestry – another lie.
https://nordic.businessinsider.com/donald-trump-told-the-world-he-was-of-swedish-ancestry---but-its-a-lie-2016-8/
So if we compare Warren's claims of about her ancestry, and Trump's claims about his own – or anyone else's – ancestry, whom should we believe?
Then there's the problem of the racist epithet "Pocahontas." The man is not just a liar, he is despicable.
6
@cc You mistake what Donald Trump said. He said he would pay a charity $1 million if a DNA test showed that Elizabeth Warren is an American Indian. That's what she has claimed.
Not that she has a distant American Indian ancestor. But that she herself is an American Indian -- specifically, a Cherokee.
Just look at her. She's no more an American Indian than she is black. She should admit it, and apologize for claiming to be one. Until then, "Pocahontas" is a fair jab at her.
5
I like Warren a lot and she is a champion for regular people in the Senate. But nowhere near the party's best candidate against Trump.
5
As a member of the Cherokee Nation, I concur that Elizabeth Warren's candidacy is all but dead. Even so, without a forceful apology and denunciation of the use of very questionable genetic testing to justify her claims of Native "heritage," she will never regain her standing as an ally among the tribes.
Further, with the upcoming battle over the Indian Child Welfare Act in Brackeen v. Zinke and other important administrative and legislative assaults on tribal sovereignty, there are far more important things to worry about for the nation's 573 federally recognized tribes.
Let's move on.
5
@BothSides
My wife agrees with you(she's a NA Indian born in Canada).
It is nothing short of 'theft' of NA Indian culture. Full Stop!
The folks that criticize non-Mexicans for eating burritos, then simultaneously give Warren a pass on this are worse than hypocrites; they are enablers! They condone actual 'appropriation' that literally causes harm to Indian communities; while at the same time create cultural tensions in the USA by falsely accusing others of "appropriation/racism" for simply enjoying the benefits of multiculturalism(ie sharing).
Sorry for the rant... I really did enjoy your comment. Cheers
2
@BothSides
It's kind of confusing how in 1980, the Cherokee Nation decided only descendants of those who were listed as "Cherokee By Blood" in one of the Dawes rolls are eligible for citizenship thereby kicking off all the Freedmen descendants.
But now the Cherokee Nation seems to be saying, vis-à-vis Senator Warren, that DNA/Cherokee "blood" is irrelevant. If genetics no longer matter, and by the way, she's never asked for Cherokee citizenship, can the Freedmen descendants get re-enrolled?
In public and educational sector employment (hiring is competitive, even at lower levels, due to good security and benefits) there's cynicism about those claiming to be underrepresented minorities for affirmative action purposes without 100% legitimacy. There's a perceived cloud over Ms. Warren's academic career in this regard. It may be completely unjustified. I don't have the evidence, and I care passionately about evidence. Mr. Trump does not. But it's his exploitation of this issue (not Ms. Warren's past ethnic claims per se) that drove her in my opinion to get and make public the DNA test. She should've focused on evidence her academic career wasn't helped by self-identification as Native American.
This controversy exposes something very wrong with the Democratic party and why we lose elections. I have mixed feelings about Senator Warren taking the test, but for many of us to continue to focus on this and criticize her... THAT is what is playing into Trump's hands. Wow. To hear someone who believes in the party would now not vote for her because of this- even in an election against Trump... now MY "jaw is on the floor." For the record, I am Puerto Rican and I live and work in the field of social justice and education. I am aware of the frameworks that criticize her decision to take the test, and again, I am not saying I support her taking the test... but come on. Wow.
11
The problem is the "need" for a minority hire by Harvard. Recruiters focused on what Ms. Warren had evidently filled out in a survey, They enriched themselves by bringing her to Harvard's attention. And Harvard most likely then jumped at the opportunity to make the. Harvard looked good, the recruiter looked good and probably got handsomely paid. Further investigations of academic recruiters And their efforts in minority placement in colleges and universities might prove enlightening.
3
For a Democrat to prevail in 2020, all who want that must pull together. Constructive criticism YES. Destructive squabbling NO. The latter undermines outcome.
The key? Criticize with care - and then reinforce the good with praise. If the Progressive left and the Resistance fails to figure this out, 2020 will be lost.
7
I do hope this fine Senator and person of integrity has the sense not to run for President. She will never get the nomination, but if she did, Trump would easily defeat her -- more easily than any other Democrat, I suspect. We need her as a strong voice in the Senate. The Native ancestry issue is a drain and distraction. I wish she were not so obsessed with proving something to Trump and America.
3
Though it's not fair, this adds to other factors that will sink her election in anywhere other than the blue coastal states. Dems need the midwest, at the very least, to win the electoral college. This was evidenced in 2016.
2
Ms. Warren has as much right as anyone to share a DNA test. She should just state that information and leave it at that. Moreover, the rest of us should not be fretting about this anymore.
5
The writer is attracted to any racial issue, but this is so a non issue. It is obviously being drummed up because the public may have a sensitivity to this issue. I have a native American somewhere in my heritage and I am proud of it. We are all made up of a variety of races if you go back far enough.What is the issue here? Move on to something of substance that will really affect the public in some real way.
4
Twila Barnes' reaction to this is a perfect example of what's wrong with American politics today. Barnes probably agrees with Warren 99 out of 100 times, but she'll let the 100th time keep her from voting for Warren - even in an election against Trump! Purity in politics - on the left and on the right - is a vice, not a virtue. There are no perfect candidates, only better and worse ones. Vote for the better ones, or risk being responsible for the worse ones winning.
9
Thank you for this piece. I am appalled by the number of comments that refer to the pushback on Warren as right wing nuts, left wing masochists, or simply activists. In a world that erases us and takes as much of our autonomy as possible, we have every right to assert our own definitions, our own communities, and our own opinions. If the Democrats or Warren want us, they can do better for us. POC are more than our votes.
5
This current iteration of "Is She or Isn't She?" is symbolic of the failure of the current political climate. Instead of bone spurs to avoid going into the draft, we see "Native American" to foster going from Rutgers Law to Harvard. Each gamed the system for their personal benefit. What's the ethical difference between the acts?
2
"Ms. Barnes, a self-described liberal, to make something of a personal pledge: She will never vote for Ms. Warren under any circumstance, including in an election against Mr. Trump."
You, Ms. Barnes, are the problem. Not Elizabeth Warren or her mistaken choice to take the DNA test.
7
I am so proud that Elizabeth Warren is my senator, but I wish she would not run for president. we need to defeat Trump and she cannot do it. We need to recognize the importance of African Americans to the Democratic party. Without a big vote from minority voters, we cannot beat Trump. She's not the one.
3
This has shown me that Elizabeth Warren doesn't really see or get her whiteness. The criticisms of tribal statements also exhibit that. The NYT itself struggles with this, as many critics have observed. I certainly do. I don't think heaping criticism on her is helpful. Nevertheless, the insensitivity she has shown on this issue has led me to doubt her as a presidential candidate. I am an old-school, FDR Democrat. I think the times call for something new.
3
I guarantee you that if Trump and his team could pick their opponent in 2020 they would pick Elizabeth Warren
She has a demeanour that manages to convey both weakness and hysteria in equal amounts and has spent her entire working life in academia and government and has never worked in the private sector.
Can anyone seriously imagine her as commander in chief?
8
The criticism of Warren says much more about the critics than it does about Warren. If she had held her silence, ignored the attacks, the same smears would have simply kept coming accompanied by accusations of dishonesty, cowardice, or whatever Trump and her attackers could think up. There seems to never be a good way out of situations like this and I believe that her actions, in light of the taunting and accusations from the right, were completely appropriate.
How did we get to a place where an attack on the integrity of a public figure, whether it is legitimate or not, and whether or not the victim of the attack responds to it, is damaging?
Why is it not the case that if these attacks are frivolous, or outright false, they cannot be reflected back on the attacker with detrimental effect? Exactly what is someone like Warren supposed to do when faced with empty accusations such as those Trump made? I am not hearing any good solutions.
5
I'm writing this before reading the article, but after reading the tease in the Times app. You'll understand why in a moment.
Senator Warren cannot win the fight against such taunts. That race has been run, and the abusive nickname given to her will only be repeated endlessly. Those who admired her work before she was a senator, and who continue to appreciate her reasonable and thoughtful positions in the days since she was elected to the Senate know better, but it doesn't matter.
She has two shortcomings: a negative, offensive and easily-repeated taunt has been established by her opponent, and she is a woman who won't fight back in kind. She is, after all, better than that, and rightly so. But this dooms her candidacy.
Perhaps her only useful political move would be to run to divert the attention of her opponents on the right and far right, so they use up some of their bilious energy chasing someone who will not, eventually, serve as their opposition.
Until the nation respects women in office - nearly always saner, more conciliatory, more productive - this is America on a treadmill of disrespect.
In the meantime, we lose the leadership of a very good person. Our loss.
3
I am grateful for this article. It helps me realize my own failings and blindspots when it comes to understanding the real depth of racial issues. Believing myself to be colorblind, I have in fact been blind to color. I plan to listen harder and make a real commitment to formulating solutions.
1
Amidst all the noises, has anyone actually noticed that leadership requires someone competent and experienced to do the job. So what whether she has this or that ancestry or whether she took this or that test? This much vaunted US democracy has really gone so far off the rails. It never cease to amaze how americans still go around the world on high horses demanding and dictating to others what they should do, how they should govern themselves, imposing sanctions, meddling in elections and so on?
Warren fell into the a Trump trap. DNA tests are probably valid and morally neutral for identifying individuals based on crime scene or other evidence they left behind (as from the notorious blue dress). Testing for racial ancestry can only lead to trouble , no matter what the intention. Her grandmother's story should have been silently absorbed into her memory. There's no way out of the hole she dug - DNA testing, no matter how accurate, does not reveal who you really are - unless you want to acquitted of a crime you didn't commit.
2
Politics are tough, but so is Elizabeth Warren. Don't get stuck in Trump's rhetorical trap. He makes blunders 10x the size of this one every day. And I'm not sure EW has done anything wrong at all here.
3
Of course, the DNA test intensified her problem. Virtually all Americans who are not from immigrant families that arrived after about 1900 have1/1000th Native blood or more. The issue was and is that she claimed a much more significant Cherokee "heritage."
5
Many commenters are missing the point here.
The point is not that Sen. Warren still compares favorably to Donald Trump, notwithstanding this misstep. It is that she compares VERY unfavorably to many other potential Democratic candidates.
Put your energy behind a Democratic candidate that can inspire and lead a continental majority out of this awful chapter of our history.
Albeit unintentionally, she is going to drag us back into the muck of identity politics, rather than to a new majority based on our common interests. We need to turn the page by forging a new majority sensibility. Warren simply can't do it, no matter how smart and right she is on the issues.
3
This is a big nothingburger, to use a current figure of speech. I recall in a biography of Winston Churchill reading that he was 1/16th Iroquois. It's not unusual to read an obituary in the NYT that mentions that the deceased was descended from someone who came to North America on the Mayflower. That probably had little or nothing with the individual's accomplishments in life. It may be interesting to know but means nothing in the vast scheme of things.
To paraphrase MLK, Jr., I look to a day when people will not be judged by their DNA, but by the content of their character.
6
Elizabeth Warren claimed Native American status to advance first, her academic career and later, her political career. That it has backfired on her has nothing at all to do with Trump.
7
This non-issue has grown way out of the petri dish in which it was spawned.
It would be nice if the media didn't keep incubating it. This would deprive a lot of people of an outlet for their victim blaming and Monday morning quarterbacking and allow Ms. Warren to focus on more substantive issues.
3
I guess I am missing the finer points of this debate. My father was Mexican. I carry his name and although I was always the best student in my class and never bullied I resented the inability of fellow students to pronounce my last name correctly (it's Spanish Basque). In a predominantly Anglo community (Seal Beach) I took that as an affront even though my mother was an Anglo/German Midwesterner.
As I result I identified reciprocally as Mexican. I am now 70 years old and my brother volunteered last year that we might be part Native American due to our father's heritage and the fact that we tolerate corn and tomatoes well (he's into all things diet after recovering from lymphoma).
On a whim I decided to sent a sample of spit to Ancestry. In their most recent calculations I am mostly Anglo, some Irish, some German, and sadly, no Iberian. I am also 6% Native American. That I have some Native American ancestry is not in doubt but I have no idea where or how.
I can trace the Mexican side of my ancestry back to Conquest and then, in a reversal of fortunes, someone who was executed by the Spanish and had his head hung in a basket for participating in the Revolution of 1810 - Juan Aldama.
I find the racialism of DJT and large swathes of American society an affront. On a personal level it led me to mistrust others simply on the basis of their fair hair and complexion even though I recently discovered that I was "one of them". Americans need to put this divisive nonsense aside.
4
Senator Warren often sounds emotionally exuberant to the point of appearing a little off, in my opinion. It's no surprise her judgment would be off here. She makes it too easy to poke fun at her. If she were smarter, she'd take a page out of the Bush playbook and make fun of herself. Humor is a great uniter.
3
@AACNY
Yes we women were taught that. Make nice. Take the sting out of it for others. She should probably wear lower cut tops and let her hair grow too. Maybe it would help her image.
@seaperl
No one said she had to be "nice" or change her appearance, but not appearing wide-eyed and a bit insane is helpful.
Take the identity lenses and earplugs out. You'll see a lot more.
1
I'm from Elizabeth Warren's neighborhood. I supported her campaigns for Senate, and love her as one of our senators. There simply aren't enough ways to explain how I would never support her in a run for president. I wish she would stop wasting everyone's time with flirting with the idea of running. I already find the noise around her annoying for all the wrong reasons.
2
Warren is the Trump of the Left. Both delight in trading insulting tweets. Both define their positions by angrily denouncing anyone who opposes them. Both have legions of zealous followers who will obey and follow without question. Both grandly promise that everyone will be comfortably well off and taken care of, if they just vote for Warren/Trump. Both back up their grandiose claims with fuzzy math and few specifics. The question Democrats will have to ask themselves in the primaries is whether it is a good idea to fight their Trump with our Trump.
Sen. Warrewn should run for President. Aside from her sound political judgement, if for no other reason she can represent all of us who have been bullied and wish we had been successful standing up to one.
4