# The Silencing of Elizabeth Warren **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [February 8, 2017, 1:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-silencing-of-elizabeth-warren/779322 "2017-02-08T13:26:17Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![drad\_dog](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/aeb1de/32.png) [@drad\_dog](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/drad_dog)\ **Post date:** [February 10, 2017, 12:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-silencing-of-elizabeth-warren/779322/81 "2017-02-10T00:56:02Z")
> [@RandMcnally](#): > > The best thing to come out of all of this is the line, “Nevertheless, she persisted.” I’m thinking of putting that somewhere in my daughter’s room. Just be careful she doesn’t quote it right back to you after the “weed” talk or worse. ---
**Author:** ![CookingWithGas](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cookingwithgas/32/485_2.png) [@CookingWithGas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CookingWithGas)\ **Post date:** [February 10, 2017, 3:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-silencing-of-elizabeth-warren/779322/82 "2017-02-10T03:24:32Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > This is reminiscent of the umpteen threads on the SDMB about ‘but why can’t we call racists racists in GD???’ The Senate is supposed to be like GD - Warren should be redirected to the Pit. The Pit is reserved for personal attacks and vitriolic rants. Warren was making a reasoned, measured argument. That should be appropriate in any venue. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [February 10, 2017, 2:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-silencing-of-elizabeth-warren/779322/83 "2017-02-10T14:52:38Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#): > > It’s been established that he has a firm basis in the rules. Cite? I think you have convinced yourself that he has a firm basis in the rules. I don’t agree. > [@](#): > > What we’re discussing here is whether he’s enforcing it in an even-handed manner. If he’s consistent about warning first and then shutting down, then he is.She continued to read the parts of the letter which were defamatory to Sessions. The others who read that letter read different parts. The question isn’t whether he is consistently following up on warnings. The question is whether he is being consistent in his issuance of warnings in the first place. Schumer pointed out some of this inconsistency (along with a healthy dose of partisan sniping): Other senators have read the exact same passage: [http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/senate/318515-sanders-dems-read-coretta-scott-kings-letter-after-warren-silenced](http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/senate/318515-sanders-dems-read-coretta-scott-kings-letter-after-warren-silenced) “Sanders read the entirety of the letter including a portion — which got Warren in hot water on Tuesday night” As did Jeff Merkley, Sherrod brown, and Tom Udall. > **[After Republicans Rebuke Elizabeth Warren Four Other Senators Read Same...](https://www.thenewcivilrightsmovement.com/2017/02/after_republicans_rebuke_elizabeth_warren_for_reading_coretta_scott_king_s_letter_two_others_senators_read_same_letter_uninterrupted/)** > > 'She Was Warned. She Was Given an Explanation. Nevertheless, She Persisted.' ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [February 10, 2017, 2:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-silencing-of-elizabeth-warren/779322/84 "2017-02-10T14:59:49Z")
> [@CalMeacham](#): > > More interesting (though ultimately irrelevant) tidbits, courtesy of the Pit, this time from the Sean Spicer thread: > > Coretta Scott King would support for Attorney General the man she opposed for a judicial post? Definitely an alternate reality. > [Democrats | Mediaite](http://www.mediaite.com/tv/sean-spicer-responds-to-warren-and-outcry-from-senate-democrats-counterproductive/) Sessions is a different man today than he was 30 years ago and people can cahnge. For example, I suspect that her feelings about senator Byrd (who filibustered the Civil Rights Act) might have changed over 30 years. But I do not see the same dramatic change in Sessions that we saw in Byrd. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [February 10, 2017, 3:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-silencing-of-elizabeth-warren/779322/85 "2017-02-10T15:01:53Z")
> [@ThelmaLou](#): > > “Most people” except Senate Republicans. McConnell really blew this one. Warren got tons more coverage than if he’d just let her talk. But, she was hurting Sessions’ feewings (I don’t think Sessions was even present at the time) ---
**Author:** ![CalMeacham](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/calmeacham/32/35_2.png) [@CalMeacham](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CalMeacham)\ **Post date:** [February 10, 2017, 3:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-silencing-of-elizabeth-warren/779322/86 "2017-02-10T15:27:45Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > Sessions is a different man today than he was 30 years ago and people can cahnge. For example, I suspect that her feelings about senator Byrd (who filibustered the Civil Rights Act) might have changed over 30 years. But I do not see the same dramatic change in Sessions that we saw in Byrd. It’s trivial to say that, although there are examples of people making a switch (look at George “Segregation now, Segregation forever” Wallace later in his career), but it’s hard to shake the habits of a lifetime. Your supposition imagines that Sessions himself has changed significantly, and that Coretta Scott King would have changed her own views significantly because of that. When you multiply an unlikelihood by and unlikelihood you get a probably-won’t-happen. The probability of King theoretically supporting Sessions appears vanishingly small to me. ---
**Author:** ![Fotheringay-Phipps](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/d9b06d/32.png) [@Fotheringay-Phipps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fotheringay-Phipps)\ **Post date:** [February 10, 2017, 3:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-silencing-of-elizabeth-warren/779322/87 "2017-02-10T15:55:09Z")
> [@CalMeacham](#): > > It’s trivial to say that, although there are examples of people making a switch (look at George “Segregation now, Segregation forever” Wallace later in his career), but it’s hard to shake the habits of a lifetime. Your supposition imagines that Sessions himself has changed significantly, and that Coretta Scott King would have changed her own views significantly because of that. When you multiply an unlikelihood by and unlikelihood you get a probably-won’t-happen. The probability of King theoretically supporting Sessions appears vanishingly small to me. It’s a bit more complicated than that. FWIW, IMO the notion that anyone might have changed their views on Sessions since 30 years ago doesn’t rest on the supposition that Sessions has radically changed since then. Rather, that even the judgment made 30 years ago was resting on an extrapolation from a few data points, and that in the intervening years there’s a lot more to work with, which change the overall assessment. But I agree with you as to the ultimate point. “_The probability of King theoretically supporting Sessions appears vanishingly small to me_.” Me too. But the reason for that is because my view of King is such that I don’t care what she would have thought about it altogether. Meaning, I don’t think there’s any reason to think King would have done anything different than any of the contemporary liberals/civil rights people, all of whom seem to be opposing Sessions. But then, I wouldn’t assign her views any more weight than I would to these contemporary people, either. To the extent that you’re granting King and her views some sort of unique status, it’s because you’re presuming that she’s some sort of saintly figure, who would never impugn someone as a racist just because they disagree with their politics or the like, and if she were indeed such a person then she might well have changed her view in light of the last 30 years. ---
**Author:** ![CalMeacham](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/calmeacham/32/35_2.png) [@CalMeacham](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CalMeacham)\ **Post date:** [February 10, 2017, 5:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-silencing-of-elizabeth-warren/779322/88 "2017-02-10T17:27:41Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#): > > It’s a bit more complicated than that. > > But then, I wouldn’t assign her views any more weight than I would to these contemporary people, either. To the extent that you’re granting King and her views some sort of unique status, it’s because you’re presuming that she’s some sort of saintly figure, who would never impugn someone as a racist just because they disagree with their politics or the like, and if she were indeed such a person then she might well have changed her view in light of the last 30 years. I’m not assigning her “saintly status” either – I’m responding to Sean Spicer’s bizarre statement that he hoped that, were she still alive, she would support Sessions. And the only reason he brought her up was because Warren quoted from her letter years earlier opposing Sessions, which she wrote as a recognized public figure, not from any “saintly” status. > **[Sean Spicer Imagines World Where Coretta Scott King Blesses Sessions' Nomination](https://crooksandliars.com/2017/02/sean-spicer-imagines-world-where-coretta)** > > Hope springs eternal, Sean. ---
**Author:** ![Fotheringay-Phipps](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/d9b06d/32.png) [@Fotheringay-Phipps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fotheringay-Phipps)\ **Post date:** [February 10, 2017, 5:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-silencing-of-elizabeth-warren/779322/89 "2017-02-10T17:38:18Z")
But the only reason Warren quoted from her letter years earlier opposing Sessions is due to her purported saintly status. Otherwise who cares what she wrote 30 years ago? ---
**Author:** ![CalMeacham](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/calmeacham/32/35_2.png) [@CalMeacham](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CalMeacham)\ **Post date:** [February 10, 2017, 5:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-silencing-of-elizabeth-warren/779322/90 "2017-02-10T17:53:39Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#): > > But the only reason Warren quoted from her letter years earlier opposing Sessions is due to her purported saintly status. Otherwise who cares what she wrote 30 years ago? “Saintly” ain’t the word – she was a Civil Rights advocate who was married to one of the most famous of them all, and who was still involved. The name gave her recognition and weight. The reason for quoting from a thirty year old letter was that that was the last time his name came up in a hearing for a federal position, and this was a very notable and relevant objection to his nomination. It still is. Yeah, her name carries weight in large part because of her husband’s assassination, but people immediately know who was saying these things and why. People would be less likely to be swayed by the words of a contemporary lawyer they never heard of. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [February 10, 2017, 6:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-silencing-of-elizabeth-warren/779322/91 "2017-02-10T18:08:39Z")
> [@CalMeacham](#): > > It’s trivial to say that, although there are examples of people making a switch (look at George “Segregation now, Segregation forever” Wallace later in his career), but it’s hard to shake the habits of a lifetime. Your supposition imagines that Sessions himself has changed significantly, and that Coretta Scott King would have changed her own views significantly because of that. When you multiply an unlikelihood by and unlikelihood you get a probably-won’t-happen. The probability of King theoretically supporting Sessions appears vanishingly small to me. I agree. See last sentence of my previous post. ---
**Author:** ![davida03801](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b5e925/32.png) [@davida03801](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/davida03801)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2017, 1:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-silencing-of-elizabeth-warren/779322/92 "2017-02-11T13:56:26Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > Sessions is a different man today than he was 30 years ago and people can cahnge. For example, I suspect that her feelings about senator Byrd (who filibustered the Civil Rights Act) might have changed over 30 years. But I do not see the same dramatic change in Sessions that we saw in Byrd. It only dems, libs and progressives that can change their spots. You can be a card carrying member of the KKK, but if your a democrat that is not a problem at all since you have changed. You can be a fake Indian with high cheekbone but no Tribal connections at all and use your fake credentials to get into top tier law schools as a professor, but all is forgiven if your a Dem. You can abuse women all you want but all is forgiven if your a dem. The list goes on and on. But if you on the other side oh no. Once tainted your tainted for life. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2017, 2:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-silencing-of-elizabeth-warren/779322/93 "2017-02-11T14:01:50Z")
> [@davida03801](#): > > It only dems, libs and progressives that can change their spots. > > You can be a card carrying member of the KKK, but if your a democrat that is not a problem at all since you have changed. > > You can be a fake Indian with high cheekbone but no Tribal connections at all and use your fake credentials to get into top tier law schools as a professor, but all is forgiven if your a Dem. > > You can abuse women all you want but all is forgiven if your a dem. > > The list goes on and on. > > But if you on the other side oh no. Once tainted your tainted for life. Byrd publicly renounced his kkk views and has been highly critical of them and supportive of civil rights until his death. Sessions never renounced (or even acknowledged, I believe) past racist views. He continued to defend racist symbols like the confederate flag, and opposed issues related to civil and voting rights. ---
**Author:** ![drad\_dog](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/aeb1de/32.png) [@drad\_dog](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/drad_dog)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2017, 6:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-silencing-of-elizabeth-warren/779322/94 "2017-02-11T18:39:04Z")
> [@davida03801](#): > > It only dems, libs and progressives that can change their spots. > > You can be a card carrying member of the KKK, but if your a democrat that is not a problem at all since you have changed. > > You can be a fake Indian with high cheekbone but no Tribal connections at all and use your fake credentials to get into top tier law schools as a professor, but all is forgiven if your a Dem. > > You can abuse women all you want but all is forgiven if your a dem. > > The list goes on and on. > > But if you on the other side oh no. Once tainted your tainted for life. ??? Don the con is a democrat? Or did you just wake up after a loooong sleep? Look at a newspaper. ---
**Author:** ![Rick\_Kitchen](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rick_kitchen/32/522_2.png) [@Rick\_Kitchen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rick_Kitchen)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2017, 7:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-silencing-of-elizabeth-warren/779322/95 "2017-02-11T19:19:18Z")
> [@](#): > > You can be a fake Indian with high cheekbone but no Tribal connections at all and use your fake credentials to get into top tier law schools as a professor, but all is forgiven if your a Dem. Got a single example of this having happened? ---
**Author:** ![madsircool](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/madsircool/32/3432_2.png) [@madsircool](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/madsircool)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2017, 8:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-silencing-of-elizabeth-warren/779322/96 "2017-02-11T20:31:28Z")
Err… > **[Is Elizabeth Warren Native American or What?](https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/05/is-elizabeth-warren-native-american-or-what/257415/)** > > The Democratic Senate candidate can't back up family lore that she is part Cherokee—but neither is there any evidence that she benefited professionally from these stories. ---
**Author:** ![k9bfriender](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/k9bfriender/32/3283_2.png) [@k9bfriender](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/k9bfriender)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2017, 10:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-silencing-of-elizabeth-warren/779322/97 "2017-02-11T22:07:14Z")
> [@madsircool](#): > > Err… > > [Is Elizabeth Warren Actually Native American? - The Atlantic](http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/05/is-elizabeth-warren-native-american-or-what/257415/) What school did she get into because of her supposed heritage? > [@your cite](#): > > The Democratic Senate candidate can’t back up family lore that she is part Indian – but neither is there any evidence that she benefited professionally from these stories. Now, genealogy is messy, my father and grandfather used to argue over whether or not we were related to a few particular famous individuals. My grandfather was convinced that we were, as those were the stories that he had heard, but my father, having done rather extensive genealogy, found that those stories were not true. So, if she made a claim based on family lore that was later refuted by further research, and never actually received any benefit from the claim, what exactly is the point here? ---
**Author:** ![running\_coach](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/running_coach/32/15836_2.png) [@running\_coach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/running_coach)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2017, 10:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-silencing-of-elizabeth-warren/779322/98 "2017-02-11T22:15:25Z")
> [@davida03801](#): > > It only dems, libs and progressives that can change their spots. > > You can be a fake Indian with high cheekbone but no Tribal connections at all and use your fake credentials to get into top tier law schools as a professor, but all is forgiven if your a Dem. > [@Rick\_Kitchen](#): > > Got a single example of this having happened? > [@madsircool](#): > > Err… > > [Is Elizabeth Warren Actually Native American? - The Atlantic](http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/05/is-elizabeth-warren-native-american-or-what/257415/) [Elizabeth Warren, Wealthy Native American? Rumor: Elizabeth Warren lives in a multi-million-dollar mansion and relied on scant Native American heritage claims to land a job at Harvard.](http://www.snopes.com/politics/politicians/warren.asp) > [@](#): > > MIXTURE: > > ``` > TRUE: Elizabeth Warren’s home is likely worth more than the average American home, and the Senator has spoken of her Native American ancestry. > > FALSE: Elizabeth Warren lives in a mansion valued at several million dollars. > > UNPROVEN: Elizabeth Warren used claims of Native American heritage to gain an edge over other candidates for a job at Harvard; Warren drew the salary for teaching only one class. > > ``` > > The legitimacy of Warren’s claims to Native American heritage has certainly been challenged by many critics, and it is true that while Warren was at U. Penn. Law School she put herself on the “Minority Law Teacher” list as Native American) in the faculty directory of the Association of American Law Schools, and that Harvard Law School at one time promoted Warren as a Native American faculty member. But specific evidence that she gained her position at Harvard (at least in part) through her claims to Native American heritage is lacking. Warren denied applying for special consideration as a person of Native American heritage during her career, and when the matter was examined in 2012 in response to Brown’s claims, people with whom Warren had worked similarly denied her ancestral background’s factoring into the professional opportunities afforded her: ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2017, 11:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-silencing-of-elizabeth-warren/779322/99 "2017-02-11T23:47:30Z")
Yeah, Warren’s tales of Native American ancestry seem questionable, at best, but there is no evidence she is some sort of AA beneficiary. We’ve been over this at least a dozen times on this MB over the last few years. Nothing ever comes up to substantiate a claim that she used her alleged NA ancestry to benefit her career. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2017, 11:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-silencing-of-elizabeth-warren/779322/100 "2017-02-11T23:57:20Z")
My family (dad’s side) claimed native American ancestry for decades. Then, out of curiosity, a few of us did DNA ancestry tests. The result? My grandfather was one eighth African (thus I am 1/32nd). Almost certainly this was an invented story to explain his (and probably his mother’s) dark skin. I would have honestly claimed it was true, or probably true, until we did the ancestry tests. Warren’s family may have had the same story, whether because it was true or for some other reason. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-silencing-of-elizabeth-warren/779322.md?page=4) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-silencing-of-elizabeth-warren/779322.md?page=6)