• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Trump Brings Back ‘Pocahontas’ Slur Of Elizabeth Warren At Ceremony For Native American Veterans

You seem to have omitted the rest of his post (I'd also note you didn't provide any links to sources, unlike what you omitted from his post):
You mean, just as you started by omitting the entirety of my posted response to him? Methinks a criticism hoisted by one's own petard, no?

Anyway the reason should be obvious; there is a 5000 word limit. The length of my reply precluded of repeat of that he knew he already written. Hence "..." .

Should you have anything original to offer, feel free to snip my quote in order to make room. But should you have nothing else to offer, you needn't bother to reproduce some other person's missive, one that has already been refuted - it doesn't make it any stronger.

Finally, I provided a link to my information to the author in a prior post. Here it is again: https://www.debatepolitics.com/redi...-warren-native-american-cherokee-controversy/

Enjoy.
 
Last edited:
You mean, just as you started by omitting the entirety of my posted response to him? Methinks a criticism hoisted by one's own petard, no?

Anyway the reason should be obvious; there is a 5000 word limit. The length of my reply precluded of repeat of that he knew he already written. Hence "..." .

1. Your post was 461. Mine was 463. Therefore yours was at the top of the page such that anyone who opened to that page would see yours first. Mine was only two below it. They'll also see it if the follow either this post back or the post it responds to back. Therefore, your complaint is rather stupidly dishonest.

2. The portion I didn't snip out didn't actually disprove what he had posted. You didn't even provide a link in it. It was clearly you copy/pasting from some site but there was no way to get to that site.

3. Anyway, the reason for me cutting out most of your unsourced post should be obvious; there is a 5000 word limit. And his post was long. So was your unsourced post. Of course, I didn't bother to find out because #1. Now, reread the final sentence of #1

So yeah, keep talking about petards....



Should you have anything original to offer, feel free to snip my quote in order to make room. But should you have nothing else to offer, you needn't bother to reproduce some other person's missive, one that has already been refuted - it doesn't make it any stronger.

Finally, I provided a link to my information to the author in a prior post. Here it is again: https://www.debatepolitics.com/redi...-warren-native-american-cherokee-controversy/

Why would I add more to his post when his post and sources invalidate your Trump defense, you didn't actually reply to those sources or statements?
 
Last edited:
See, you can't even get that simple fact correct.

She was recruited. She didn't apply. She was hot sauce, tops in her field of expertise, and they wanted her badly.

But congrats to you all cracky cons for turning the discussion into something long ago put to bed (apparently the voters saw through the bull**** to elect her) -- and ignoring the reason for the current discussion -- that being Trump
is
an
awful
disgusting
pitiful
human
being.

I guess you've never had the pleasure of being recruited for a professional position. Those who have KNOW that recruiters look for one or more potential candidates for a position and RECRUIT based on the information publically available; you know, like the fake listing as a minority.

Moreover, we also know that if the candidate expresses an interest they are encouraged to apply and fill out the same application employment forms as any other employee, after which they are selected and are given an offer.
 
A poll is more important than NA representation? Yeah, that's not cherry picking weak material and pretending that overrides the official position of NA organizations and representatives. What does a nation's representative or the president of the preeminent NA organization mean? Nothing of course, if one is committed to supporting racial slurs.

Good thing you can be offended in place of the actual Navajo Veterans that were honored by Trump. Progressives, the most overly sensitive creature to ever exist.

Navajo Code Talker Breaks Silence After Trump Mocks ?Pocahontas.? What He Says Is Amazing. | Daily Wire

CNN political analyst Joshua Green met with Thomas Begay – one of the veterans honored at the event – who said that while he was puzzled by the comment, he was not offended by it.

“The Marines made us yell ‘Geronimo’ when we jumped out of planes, and that didn’t offend me either,” Begay said

The progressive brand of liberalism is clearly clown shoes.
 
A poll is more important than NA representation? Yeah, that's not cherry picking weak material and pretending that overrides the official position of NA organizations and representatives. What does a nation's representative or the president of the preeminent NA organization mean? Nothing of course, if one is committed to supporting racial slurs.

It means the NA leadership is out of touch with their people.

New poll finds 9 in 10 Native Americans aren't offended by Redskins name - The Washington Post
Washington Post › local › 2016/05/18



May 19, 2016 · Nine in 10 Native Americans say they are not offended by the Washington Redskins name, according to a new Washington Post poll that shows how few ordinary Indians have been persuaded by a ...







How The Washington Post conducted the survey on the Redskins' name - The Washington Post
Washington Post › local › 2016/05/19


May 19, 2016 · Polling the Native American population presents its own specific set of challenges.


 
I guess you've never had the pleasure of being recruited for a professional position.
...

I'm the one who does the hiring, mr. "pleasure." I've owned my own firm for many decades, and you trying to tell me how hiring practices are done, as if you have any clue, especially as it regards one of the high rising stars in academia -- is laughable.

On stilts.
 
Good thing you can be offended in place of the actual Navajo Veterans that were honored by Trump. Progressives, the most overly sensitive creature to ever exist.

Navajo Code Talker Breaks Silence After Trump Mocks ?Pocahontas.? What He Says Is Amazing. | Daily Wire



The progressive brand of liberalism is clearly clown shoes.

Well, if someone isn't offended, then clearly it's fine.

A guy in my jump school yelled Geronimo jumping out of the towers with cables before the chute tower then planes. He got in trouble and then did it again and more trouble. Didn't see him more that day.
 
Well, if someone isn't offended, then clearly it's fine.

A guy in my jump school yelled Geronimo jumping out of the towers with cables before the chute tower then planes. He got in trouble and then did it again and more trouble. Didn't see him more that day.

Yeah....why is that? Oh...I know. People like you and those in your clownish made up profession. And, again, funny how the actual people involved don't care but you are going to double-down on being offended on their behalf. Freaking epic.
 
It means the NA leadership is out of touch with their people.

New poll finds 9 in 10 Native Americans aren't offended by Redskins name - The Washington Post
Washington Post › local › 2016/05/18



May 19, 2016 · Nine in 10 Native Americans say they are not offended by the Washington Redskins name, according to a new Washington Post poll that shows how few ordinary Indians have been persuaded by a ...


How The Washington Post conducted the survey on the Redskins' name - The Washington Post
Washington Post › local › 2016/05/19



May 19, 2016 · Polling the Native American population presents its own specific set of challenges.

Jesus Jack, you should bundle one of these with every post....

413EvfshYlL._SL500_AC_SS350_.jpg
 
Yeah....why is that? Oh...I know. People like you and those in your clownish made up profession. And, again, funny how the actual people involved don't care but you are going to double-down on being offended on their behalf. Freaking epic.

I'm not offended. I object to the marginalization of a minority, including historical figures, because it harms society in artificially limiting potential and realization. "Bringing down the name" is not cool. Fauxahontas will do, unless one's belligerent against all reason and respect. Most reasonably minded reps and cons I see here find it inappropriate.
 
Well, if someone isn't offended, then clearly it's fine.

A guy in my jump school yelled Geronimo jumping out of the towers with cables before the chute tower then planes. He got in trouble and then did it again and more trouble. Didn't see him more that day.

What did Geronimo say as he was jumping out of an airplane?






MeeeeeeeeeeeEEEEEEeeeeeee!
 
I don't think we can call her a fraud until we've walked a mile in her moccasins.

Wait...so you are saying we should ALL lie about our heritage, claim minority status, marry rich republican bankers, take half a million for teaching a single class, and pretend to give a **** about the poor and oppressed?

That seems exhausting.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
1. Your post was 461. Mine was 463. Therefore yours was at the top of the page such that anyone who opened to that page would see yours first. Mine was only two below it. They'll also see it if the follow either this post back or the post it responds to back. Therefore, your complaint is rather stupidly dishonest.

Mr Person, the only stupidity readily apparent is your lame excuse for your hypocritical blunder. I don't care how close or how far your followup post was to mine. Anyone seeking to read the post that is being replied too can simply click on ">>", be it Paperview or myself.

The point is that I am mocking you for transparent hypocrisy - you did WHAT YOU JUST accused me of (failing to reproduce a quote in full). Now that you are busy attempting to backfill with excuses about why your hypocrisy was okay due to an irrelevant circumstance, well it only deepens the hole you are in (but it does provide us much mirth).

2. The portion I didn't snip out didn't actually disprove what he had posted. You didn't even provide a link in it. It was clearly you copy/pasting from some site but there was no way to get to that site.

Actually what I paraphrased and copied was a direct and exact refutation of his nonsense, with or without a link. Facts are facts, and Paperview's commentary failed to note Warren's own actions. You chose to ignore that.

So you were sent the link a post ago, may I assume this constant whining will end and you will actually address the points made?

3. Anyway, the reason for me cutting out most of your unsourced post should be obvious; there is a 5000 word limit. And his post was long. So was your unsourced post. Of course, I didn't bother to find out because #1. Now, reread the final sentence of #1.

So yeah, keep talking about petards..

As stated, I don't care why you chose to be hypocritical - you got caught and that is that. However, I do appreciate a substantive contribution, and it's not substantive to simply repeat that which has already been posted.

We will wait to see if you are able or willing to do so.
 
Last edited:
No I'm not saying any of that. I was using your post as a launching pad for another hilarious E. Warren Indian joke.




Wait...so you are saying we should ALL lie about our heritage, claim minority status, marry rich republican bankers, take half a million for teaching a single class, and pretend to give a **** about the poor and oppressed?

That seems exhausting.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Wait...so you are saying we should ALL lie about our heritage, claim minority status, marry rich republican bankers, take half a million for teaching a single class, and pretend to give a **** about the poor and oppressed?

That seems exhausting.

Yeah, she rode the easy train from birth....just like Trump.


"Warren was born on June 22, 1949, in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, as the fourth child of middle class parents Pauline (née Reed, 1912–1995) and Donald Jones Herring (1911–1997 ). Warren has described her family as teetering "on the ragged edge of the middle class" and "kind of hanging on at the edges by our fingernails". She had three young brothers and was raised as a Methodist.

Warren lived in Norman until she was 11 years old, when the family moved to Oklahoma City. When she was 12, her father, a salesman at Montgomery Ward, had a heart attack—which led to many medical bills, as well as a pay cut because he could not do his previous work. Eventually, this led to the repossession their car from failure to make loan payments.

To help the family finances, her mother found work in the catalog order department at Sears.
When she was 13, Warren started waiting tables at her aunt's restaurant.

Warren became a star member of the debate team at Northwest Classen High School and won the title of "Oklahoma's top high school debater" while competing with debate teams from high schools throughout the state. She also won a debate scholarship to George Washington University at the age of 16. She initially aspired to be a teacher, but she left GWU after two years to marry her high school sweetheart, Jim Warren.

Warren and her husband moved to Houston, where he was employed by IBM, which was a subcontractor to NASA. She enrolled in the University of Houston and graduated in 1970 with a bachelor of science degree in speech pathology and audiology. For a year, she taught children with disabilities who were enrolled in a public school. Her qualifications were based on an "emergency certificate", because she had not taken the education courses that were required for a regular teaching certificate.

The Warrens moved to New Jersey when Jim received a job transfer. She soon became pregnant and decided to remain at home to care for their child. After their daughter turned two, Warren enrolled at the Rutgers University, Newark School of Law. She worked as a summer associate at Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft. Shortly before graduating in 1976, Warren became pregnant with their second child. After she received her J.D. and passed the bar examination, she decided to perform legal services from home. She wrote wills and did real estate closings."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elizabeth_Warren
 
I'm the one who does the hiring, mr. "pleasure." I've owned my own firm for many decades, and you trying to tell me how hiring practices are done, as if you have any clue, especially as it regards one of the high rising stars in academia -- is laughable.

On stilts.

So your view of academia is based on how one person hires for a self-owned business, namely yourself? How "impressive".

As I said, having worked for governments (including a college as a teacher) I am familiar with hiring practices, especially in that I also have had friends and associates who have spent a lifetime as academics.

Your Warren worship is duly noted, but it is best you not make assumptions about matters alien to your personal experience.
 
I'm not offended. I object to the marginalization of a minority, including historical figures, because it harms society in artificially limiting potential and realization. "Bringing down the name" is not cool. Fauxahontas will do, unless one's belligerent against all reason and respect. Most reasonably minded reps and cons I see here find it inappropriate.

You do realize the name is used to highlight that Elizabeth Warren is the one that exploited the Native People, right? She used it to help gain her position? It's not derogatory against the actual historical figure anymore than calling someone that is a dumbass "Einstein" is antisemitic.
 
Back
Top Bottom