Progressive Ideology

[dislaxxic]

After Warren proves Native American ancestry, Trump pretends he didn’t make $1M charitable offer

..

[tech37]

On the "civility" front, I have been having a relatively long series of discussions with a couple of my kids (one undergrad, one in grad school - both bizarre combinations of liberal and conservative that don't always line up the same way...) as the three of us read Malcolm X's biography (at the behest of the grad student). She in particular thinks that the violence that we are experiencing is just the front of the wave and that things are going to get just as ugly as they did in the 60's - and that body count included: a sitting president, a presidential candidate, MLK and Malcolm X to name a few. I tried, unsuccessfully, to make the point that surely things had to get better soon. That is not how they see it. They think it is going to get a lot worse before it get's better.

Hoodat, did your "kids" have an opinion as to who might benefit from the ongoing/increasing violence?

[HooDat]

On the "civility" front, I have been having a relatively long series of discussions with a couple of my kids (one undergrad, one in grad school - both bizarre combinations of liberal and conservative that don't always line up the same way...) as the three of us read Malcolm X's biography (at the behest of the grad student). She in particular thinks that the violence that we are experiencing is just the front of the wave and that things are going to get just as ugly as they did in the 60's - and that body count included: a sitting president, a presidential candidate, MLK and Malcolm X to name a few. I tried, unsuccessfully, to make the point that surely things had to get better soon. That is not how they see it. They think it is going to get a lot worse before it get's better.

Hoodat, did your "kids" have an opinion as to who might benefit from the ongoing/increasing violence?

that part hasn't come up - yet...

But, my thought is that the violence actually helps those already in power - as it creates chaos and as people seek to avoid chaos, they will come running back to the people and institutions that they are familiar with.

[tech37]

On the "civility" front, I have been having a relatively long series of discussions with a couple of my kids (one undergrad, one in grad school - both bizarre combinations of liberal and conservative that don't always line up the same way...) as the three of us read Malcolm X's biography (at the behest of the grad student). She in particular thinks that the violence that we are experiencing is just the front of the wave and that things are going to get just as ugly as they did in the 60's - and that body count included: a sitting president, a presidential candidate, MLK and Malcolm X to name a few. I tried, unsuccessfully, to make the point that surely things had to get better soon. That is not how they see it. They think it is going to get a lot worse before it get's better.

Hoodat, did your "kids" have an opinion as to who might benefit from the ongoing/increasing violence?

that part hasn't come up - yet...

But, my thought is that the violence actually helps those already in power - as it creates chaos and as people seek to avoid chaos, they will come running back to the people and institutions that they are familiar with.

Agreed...and independents/moderates don't want to see a return to the 60s.

[HooDat]

thought about this a little more.

I believe the dems are misplaying the midterms as badly as they did the 2016 primaries and election. The combination of the appearance of turning their back on due process during the Kavinaugh hearings and the mob rule imagery of the Kav protests and confrontations (ala Cruz) are going to hurt them. I had been thinking that the blue wave was being over-estimated by the media, and that it would instead be a blue trickle - eg: dems take the house but not the senate. I am now starting to wonder if the GOP increases their hold on each.

It is a shame because the dems have found a few good moderate condidates. But as usual, they focus on the wrong ones - Beto O'Rourke is the perfect example, he is an incredibly flawed candidate who the media fell in love with because they thought he checked some great boxes. The media even went so far as to say that he is the minority candidate in the race - when he is lilly white running against a guy named Cruz! - my prediction is that his margin of loss will be in the mid-teens.

[runrussellrun]

After Warren proves Native American ancestry, Trump pretends he didn’t make $1M charitable offer

..

So the DNA was narrowed down to Cherokee eh. The "native" American cuts it for you? And when this DNA expert claims "native" American, is he (it's always MEN in the STEM world ) talking Aleut, Pennobscot, Navajo, Seminole, or the Warao, Inca, Chimu, ?

Warren, proud of her heritage, just can't seem to get around to drafting legislation to help natives vote in North Dakota. Guess she's too busy sending correspondence to AG Sessions and trying to get the scumbags from Wells Fargo put in jail.

Atlantic, is that a pretend liberal publication? They don't think she's one.

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/ar ... at/257415/

And love the "she didn't personally benefit" from claiming being a Cherokee. But, did UPENN and Harvard? Just on the surface, if it DIDN'T benefit them, then why include it in her bio? It wasn't when she worked at Texas.

[MDlaxfan76]

thought about this a little more.

I believe the dems are misplaying the midterms as badly as they did the 2016 primaries and election. The combination of the appearance of turning their back on due process during the Kavinaugh hearings and the mob rule imagery of the Kav protests and confrontations (ala Cruz) are going to hurt them. I had been thinking that the blue wave was being over-estimated by the media, and that it would instead be a blue trickle - eg: dems take the house but not the senate. I am now starting to wonder if the GOP increases their hold on each.

It is a shame because the dems have found a few good moderate condidates. But as usual, they focus on the wrong ones - Beto O'Rourke is the perfect example, he is an incredibly flawed candidate who the media fell in love with because they thought he checked some great boxes. The media even went so far as to say that he is the minority candidate in the race - when he is lilly white running against a guy named Cruz! - my prediction is that his margin of loss will be in the mid-teens.

Curious as to why you say Beto O'Rourke "is an incredibly flawed candidate"?
Perhaps there are flaws that I'm not aware of but seems to me his chief flaw is that he's not a Republican and is running in a very deep red district.

I agree that he's likely to lose by more than 10 points, but it's a very deeply red district. Cruz's predecessor in the seat, Kay Bailey Hutchinson, won it by more than 30% each time she ran. Cruz unexpectedly won the GOP nomination and didn't enjoy a positive reputation within his own base and still won by 16% in his last time through. In our highly partisan times a Dem even threatening to make it close in that district would suggest a very good candidate, but perhaps I'm missing something.

[MDlaxfan76]

After Warren proves Native American ancestry, Trump pretends he didn’t make $1M charitable offer

..

So the DNA was narrowed down to Cherokee eh. The "native" American cuts it for you? And when this DNA expert claims "native" American, is he (it's always MEN in the STEM world ) talking Aleut, Pennobscot, Navajo, Seminole, or the Warao, Inca, Chimu, ?

Warren, proud of her heritage, just can't seem to get around to drafting legislation to help natives vote in North Dakota. Guess she's too busy sending correspondence to AG Sessions and trying to get the scumbags from Wells Fargo put in jail.

Atlantic, is that a pretend liberal publication? They don't think she's one.

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/ar ... at/257415/

And love the "she didn't personally benefit" from claiming being a Cherokee. But, did UPENN and Harvard? Just on the surface, if it DIDN'T benefit them, then why include it in her bio? It wasn't when she worked at Texas.

sheesh, why hang onto the notion that she doesn't have Native American genes? That's a 2012 article in the Atlantic, not 2018. Our gene mapping capabilities were not in existence at that point. There have been huge strides as the data sets have grown so much larger.

Criticizing her for not doing more for Native Americans may or may not be fair, but it has nothing to do with whether her family's "lore" that they included one or more Cherokee ancestors was actually correct.

This reaction seems to be all about not liking her politics. Just like the birther BS with Obama.

Seems to me that, at least on this forum, we can expect better. Go ahead and disagree with the politics and policies, but enough with the stupid smears and denials of science.

[HooDat]

Bottom line is that the very "strengths" that the national media sees are what will take him down. His stance on gun control is outside the mainstream in Texas. His vulnerability to attacks ranging from his arrest record and links to eminent domain based taking that benefited his in-laws work against him. The enormous amount of money he has raised from outside the state will not play well and adds to a list of things that leave him vulnerable to accusations of being a "carpet bagger": child of a wealthy politically connected family who attended Woodberry Forrest, but claims to be a man of the people; the national media trying to "help" by making claims about Beto being a minority candidate running against a Republican...

Cruz is not loved, by any stretch of the imagination - but he is seen as the competent know-it-all that you begrudgingly let be in charge because he should be. Beto is a pretty face in an empty suit - Texas does not like empty suits....

[tech37]

I am now starting to wonder if the GOP increases their hold on each.

Wouldn't bet against you, you called the Trump POTUS win after all.

[HooDat]

Criticizing her for not doing more for Native Americans may or may not be fair, but it has nothing to do with whether her family's "lore" that they included one or more Cherokee ancestors was actually correct.

so what would your reaction be if she had taken a spot at Dartmouth under their admission guarantees afforded Native Americans?

[Typical Lax Dad]

After Warren proves Native American ancestry, Trump pretends he didn’t make $1M charitable offer

..

So the DNA was narrowed down to Cherokee eh. The "native" American cuts it for you? And when this DNA expert claims "native" American, is he (it's always MEN in the STEM world ) talking Aleut, Pennobscot, Navajo, Seminole, or the Warao, Inca, Chimu, ?

Warren, proud of her heritage, just can't seem to get around to drafting legislation to help natives vote in North Dakota. Guess she's too busy sending correspondence to AG Sessions and trying to get the scumbags from Wells Fargo put in jail.

Atlantic, is that a pretend liberal publication? They don't think she's one.

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/ar ... at/257415/

And love the "she didn't personally benefit" from claiming being a Cherokee. But, did UPENN and Harvard? Just on the surface, if it DIDN'T benefit them, then why include it in her bio? It wasn't when she worked at Texas.

sheesh, why hang onto the notion that she doesn't have Native American genes? That's a 2012 article in the Atlantic, not 2018. Our gene mapping capabilities were not in existence at that point. There have been huge strides as the data sets have grown so much larger.

Criticizing her for not doing more for Native Americans may or may not be fair, but it has nothing to do with whether her family's "lore" that they included one or more Cherokee ancestors was actually correct.

This reaction seems to be all about not liking her politics. Just like the birther BS with Obama.

Seems to me that, at least on this forum, we can expect better. Go ahead and disagree with the politics and policies, but enough with the stupid smears and denials of science.

This is where we are in 2018.

[MDlaxfan76]

Bottom line is that the very "strengths" that the national media sees are what will take him down. His stance on gun control is outside the mainstream in Texas. His vulnerability to attacks ranging from his arrest record and links to eminent domain based taking that benefited his in-laws work against him. The enormous amount of money he has raised from outside the state will not play well and adds to a list of things that leave him vulnerable to accusations of being a "carpet bagger": child of a wealthy politically connected family who attended Woodberry Forrest, but claims to be a man of the people; the national media trying to "help" by making claims about Beto being a minority candidate running against a Republican...

Cruz is not loved, by any stretch of the imagination - but he is seen as the competent know-it-all that you begrudgingly let be in charge because he should be. Beto is a pretty face in an empty suit - Texas does not like empty suits....

Hmmm, again not sure where you get the "empty suit" aspect. Pretty face, sure. He clearly has a ton of charisma and is bright and articulate. Huge likability factor vs Cruz. But I agree that's likely not enough.

Bottomline, he's a Dem running in a deep red district. Ordinarily we wouldn't expect this to be even a conversation.

[MDlaxfan76]

Criticizing her for not doing more for Native Americans may or may not be fair, but it has nothing to do with whether her family's "lore" that they included one or more Cherokee ancestors was actually correct.

so what would your reaction be if she had taken a spot at Dartmouth under their admission guarantees afforded Native Americans?

fair question: I just responded on the other thread discussing this, so just copying here.

Re: Orange Duce
Postby MDlaxfan76 » Mon Oct 15, 2018 12:06 pm

HooDat wrote:
MDlaxfan76 wrote:
From what I've read, she never got any special benefits, whether admission to school or jobs or $ as a result of this claim. It was included in her bio.

I probably get hung up (perhaps unnecessarily) on the reasoning for WHY she includes this in her bio, starting at a specific time well into her career> I admit to being suspicious that she did so for some perceived benefit, and am probably somewhat motivated by her politics. Now part of that is reasonable, because her politics includes the championing of aggrieved groups - which presumably includes Native Americans. Her claiming that status while not having born any of the cost of it - rings of hypocrisy.

I asked this on another thread - I am curious what your reaction would be if she had used her claims to gain admission to Dartmouth?

by the way, I am a little biased on this one - as I know a family that used their 1/16th (or less) Native American heritage to get one of their kids into Dartmouth - they were loaded financially and the kid had every advantage you could imagine. It struck me as very skeezy then, and still does now.

Absolutely, if she had claimed some substantive financial benefit from having such heritage, sure it might be fair to criticize such. But there really isn't any evidence that she received some such benefit other than having a small window into such status.

Re Dartmouth, I don't know off hand how they view varying degrees of Native American heritage but I do know that they are both eager and very generous in the admissions and scholarship program if one has such heritage. I quite agree with you that the intent should be to provide access to an education for those who are actually disadvantaged. However, as you may know Dartmouth's original charter and land grant was on the basis of providing a free education to the natives, yet in reality it almost entirely was populated by whites from Boston and NY, etc from inception through it's first 150 years. The policies today undoubtedly are influenced by the original charter's obligations. But, yeah, feels "skeezy" for a highly affluent family with very little such status to be claiming such benefits. And potentially having gained preference in the admissions process, probably an even bigger deal for that family ala being on the recruited athlete list.

[a fan]

The enormous amount of money he has raised from outside the state will not play well and adds to a list of things that leave him vulnerable to accusations of being a "carpet bagger": child of a wealthy politically connected family who attended Woodberry Forrest, but claims to be a man of the people.

HooDat. This is not a serious post, is it?

Can you think of anyone else that's from a wealthy politically connected family that claims to be a man of the people?

And everyone, including many here at the Water Cooler, believe him?

[HooDat]

The enormous amount of money he has raised from outside the state will not play well and adds to a list of things that leave him vulnerable to accusations of being a "carpet bagger": child of a wealthy politically connected family who attended Woodberry Forrest, but claims to be a man of the people.

HooDat. This is not a serious post, is it?

Can you think of anyone else that's from a wealthy politically connected family that claims to be a man of the people?

And everyone, including many here at the Water Cooler, believe him?

hahaha, of course I am serious and of course you are absolutely correct.

Have I ever said that I believe that other guy to whom you refer? What I do believe is that he got elected because enough people believe he is a man of the people, or more accurately a man FOR the people - how many times have I posted pictures of Rodney Dangerfield in CaddyShack when making this point?......

[a fan]

No, no, no. Just givin' you some grief, man. I know that no one here blindly follows Trump.

But boy, you REALLY have to hand it to Hillary on her nonsense answers regarding Bill's behavior. Denial ain't just a river in Egypt...

[Typical Lax Dad]

The enormous amount of money he has raised from outside the state will not play well and adds to a list of things that leave him vulnerable to accusations of being a "carpet bagger": child of a wealthy politically connected family who attended Woodberry Forrest, but claims to be a man of the people.

HooDat. This is not a serious post, is it?

Can you think of anyone else that's from a wealthy politically connected family that claims to be a man of the people?

And everyone, including many here at the Water Cooler, believe him?

I fell out of my chair when I read that earlier.....

[Trinity]

Billary needs to go away. More vomit inducing together than when alone.

[Typical Lax Dad]

Billary needs to go away. More vomit inducing together than when alone.

For some reason, someone in the media thinks what they have to say is relevant. I don't know a single person that wants to hear from Bill or Hillary Clinton. Not a single person.