Okay then. Let me ask you this: have you ever identified yourself as a member of a particular racial group on an official document? If so, were you asked to prove it? How would you prove what race you belong to if asked to do so?
My guess would be that many people feel a strong moral imperative not to lie. To you only tell the truth when you think you’ll be caught otherwise?
I could probably claim not to be white. So long as nobody sees me dance, I might get away with it.
Are you saying the charge is that Elizabeth Warren’s entire career hinged on her claiming minority status? Are you fine with discounting all her actual work and contributions and boiling her entire career down to claiming part Native American? You are okay with that? That doesn’t strike you as the least bit incredulous? Do you really think Harvard hands out tenure to anyone who is Native American simply because they are Native American and nothing else?
If this were true, why isn’t the United States of America completely ruled by Native Americans?
This word: I do not think it means what you think it means.
No, I’ve seen you write.
Yes, they deny it. That certainly means everything is on the level. :rolleyes:
I’m a white guy. I’m in one of the groups that’s discriminated against in our current system, thus I would have no reason to lie about it. Most race groups are obvious upon appearance. Native American isn’t so people need to be able to prove it by being associated with a tribe or having documentation of an ancestor.
Of course not. But it’s silly to just assume that everyone will be honest. If you lie about your skills or experience and are caught there will be consequences. The same should be true for lying about your race.
No. I’m not. So, I’ll ignore the rest of your straw.
You have proof that trumps their outrageous lies? Bring it, let’s see.
Since we’re talking about standards of proof, I would have thought you’d be looking for something a bit more definitive than “you can tell by looking.” What race am I?
I’m currently in the process of looking for a college teaching position. The standard, accepted practice is that if there’s any chance some piece of information might be in your favor, you put it on your CV. It’s the hiring institution’s burden to decide whether that piece of information is relevant to their decision whether to hire you. So she put down that she’s part Native American. Harvard then looks at that, and decides whether it’s relevant, and whether she has enough documentation to satisfy them, and so on. Now, it’s possible that Harvard didn’t follow their own procedures in this case, but in that case, it’s 100% on them, not on her.
I see another possible scenario. Ms Warren was recruited by Harvard, so it wasn’t like there was any likelihood she needed to bolster her CV to get the job, and we have cited testimony that it played no part in the decision. Which there wasn’t much of, she was a shoo-in.
Then somebody else finds out she has some Cherokee heritage. We already have testimony that Harvard was under pressure to look more inclusive. So, maybe somebody hearing that bit of gossip just put her down as Native American, and never thought about it again. Did anybody, up until now?
I like her, and I want her to win. And I’m not saying that just because she’s so hot! Part of it, sure, but not all.
But I take Debaser’s point: next to a paragon of virtue and integrity like Scott Brown, well, what can one say?
I wasn’t saying it didn’t help her get the position; I’d have no problem with that. Although since Harvard has already said it didn’t, that’s a non-issue anyway. I’m saying she put it on her CV because she thought it was true and that it might be helpful. There’s nothing wrong with that. If Harvard had used her claim as a criteria to hire her and had not checked it, that’s their problem and not hers.
You can keep saying she lied (or was “intentionally deceptive”) but there’s no evidence that she acted in anything but good faith based on what she thought to be true about her heritage.
And the polls show that the majority of MA residents don’t care about this either.
Eligible for affirmative action and a tenured position at Harvard. 
So you put anything on there that might help you, with no regard for whether it’s true or you can prove it? Let’s assume for the sake of argument that she is just making this up to help her get the position. Complete fiction. Is that 100% on them because they didn’t check it?
What about if she lied about being a lawyer? Or lied about having a professional certification? Still on them to check? The potential employee bears no responsibility?
You’ve got it backwards. There is no evidence that her claim is true. That’s what needs evidence, not that she didn’t act in good faith.
Yeah, it is Massachusetts. 69% of people might not care, but the 27% that do probably includes a lot of independents in what will be a close race. I can’t see how anyone would argue that this isn’t a “significant story” as that poll states it. It’s leading the news in MA for a week. It’s all that is on the radio. Her entire campaign has been disrupted. She’s not getting any campaign message out while this is on the front page. To say it’s not a significant story is incorrect on it’s face.
ETA: I just edited this because I can and I’ve never done it before.
Cite?
Did I mention Scott Brown?
Could it be that she was simply proud of it?
I am obviously white, with some Cherokee blood, like I said, that is a very common blend where I’m from. How much? No way of knowing, but my family name appears on the rolls of the Trail of Tears, but that person may well have been half white or more!
Why shouldn’t she mention it, if it adds a bit of color to her story?
Already did, you dismised the testimony of people who were actually there as being self-serving lies. Do you have a cite for that?
Sorry, thought you knew. He’s the other candidate.
Okay. I’m willing to learn the proper definition. Care to set my vocabulary straight?