Plan B Forum

UGH!

Donald is such a great comedian but his timing is bad... (at :35)

Could someone explain how President Schlump's Pocahontas statement was "racist"? I'm watching CNN now and Don Lemon, Anderson Cooper and all of the panelists (other than Trumpists) are calling it a racial remark.

I think it was extremely stupid but I don't understand how President Gump was being racist. Maybe liberty would know....

It's been a while since Joe has gone into full-on Mickey the Dunce mode, clearly he is trying to make up for lost time.

Thank you, Scooter. You're always good for a laugh, just like Trump.

Scooter wrote:It's been a while since Joe has gone into full-on Mickey the Dunce mode...

Maybe JG's not faking the ignorance.

Joe Guy wrote:Could someone explain how President Schlump's Pocahontas statement was "racist"? I'm watching CNN now and Don Lemon, Anderson Cooper and all of the panelists (other than Trumpists) are calling it a racial remark.

Because he used it as an insult?

Because he uses the name "Pocahontas" (the name of the daughter of chief Powhatan, of the Pamunkey Tribe) to disparage a political enemy for her supposed unwarranted pride in being 1/32 Cherokee—basically, using that name the same way that white men used to derisively call any American Indian man, regardless of his tribe, "Geronimo" or "Crazy Horse" or "Sitting Bull"?

Because he said it when he was supposed to be honoring a group of aged Navajo WW2 heroes, and it had nothing to do with—in fact it distracted from and detracted from—that serious and important occasion? (Bonus points for doing it in front of a portrait of Andrew Jackson, architect of the Trail of Tears, BTW!)

Because it's Just. Not. Funny!?

If I call Trump Shitting Bull, is that racist?

No, only accurate.

Well...

First let me stipulate Trump's decision to use this putdown of Warren at a gathering to honor genuine Native American WW II heroes was unbelievably stupid...(Stupid to the point of being comically stupid)...and grossly inappropriate...

But it's typical of Trump...

Warren got under Trump's skin with the back-and-forth they had running during the campaign, and as with anyone else that gets under his tissue paper thin skin, he just can't let it go...

But I think trying to characterize his referring to Warren as "Pocahantas" as "racist" is pretty thin gruel...

It really dilutes and trivializes the blatant genuine racist appeals Trump has made, when he has sent his dog whistles to the racists in his base...I think it would be a real stretch to claim that Trump is trying to whip up some sort of anti Native American sentiment, in the way he has attempted to do with Mexicans and Muslims, (to name just two)

He uses it to ridicule Warren, and frankly the known facts, and Warren's own behavior regarding this invites the ridicule:

"I am very proud of my heritage," Warren told NPR in 2012. "These are my family stories. This is what my brothers and I were told by my mom and my dad, my mammaw and my pappaw. This is our lives. And I'm very proud of it."

In that account and others, a genealogist traced Warren's Native American heritage to the late 19th century, which, if true, would make her 1/32 Native American. (However, the legitimacy of those findings has been debated.)

The Washington Post's "Fact Checker" page has actually decided against judging the issue at all, offering "no rating" and, in a piece Tuesday, suggesting "readers to look into it on their own and decide whether Trump's attacks over Warren's background have merit."

Harvard Law School in the 1990s touted Warren, then a professor in Cambridge, as being "Native American." They singled her out, Warren later acknowledged, because she had listed herself as a minority in an Association of American Law Schools directory. Critics note that she had not done that in her student applications and during her time as a teacher at the University of Texas.

Warren maintains she never furthered her career by using her heritage to gain advantage. [Obviously she thought being a "minority" professor at Harvard Law would give her some sort of "cache" otherwise, why do it at all?]

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/senat ... le/2629853

Even if her unverified claim to be 1/32nd American Indian is accurate, for a person who is 1/32 anything to try to use that to define them in a way that would give them the right to call themselves a "minority" trivializes the whole concept of "minority" and invites criticism and ridicule...

Ample examples of Trump's obvious racist appeals abound. This one's pretty weak...

ETA:

I really have to wonder if we had the exact same set of facts about a Conservative Republican ( 1/32 American Indian, 31/32 white European, who had claimed to be a "minority") if the Liberal media types would have worked themselves into the same self-righteous lather that they have for the Lefty Darling, Elizabeth Warren...

(Well okay, I don't really wonder that)

In any event, I'm sure Trump would much rather have them talking about this than the latest developments in the Mueller investigation...

Lord Jim wrote:In any event, I'm sure Trump would much rather have them talking about this than the latest developments in the Mueller investigation...

Lord Jim wrote:But I think trying to characterize his referring to Warren as "Pocahantas" as "racist" is pretty thin gruel...

And should be taken with 1/32nd of a grain of salt.

Why doesn't CNN and others let the Code Talkers decide whether or not they are offended? It's bad enough how so many people seem to want to claim to be victims of something and now some people have decided to tell others when they should be offended.

This article is interesting. I'm sure Don Lemon and others are working hard behind the scenes to get at least one of the Code Talkers to realize they need to be offended. If they can't, they will find another Native American somewhere who will say what they want to hear.

and if they weren't offended joe, then all is well? I don't see that; if I use black slurs in front of a white audience (even at a Klan meeting) and no one is offended, it does not make it any less racist; ditto in front of a black audience. Using Pocohontas is like calling a native American tonto or chief; it should be avoided because it is not appropriate, whether or not someone there is offended or not is pretty immaterial--just like calling blacks Sambo or calling hispanics Pancho or Pepe. At least extend to them the same courtesy of calling them by their proper name, just as we do to everyone else. And when it comes to someone who purports to call himself leader of this country, IMHO it's even more important to act appropriately--of course, Trump doesn't understand that--he just can't resist getting an asinine "zinger" in, even if it is ridiculous.

Big RR wrote:and if they weren't offended joe, then all is well?

I guess that depends on whether or not you want them to be offended.

Big RR wrote:Using Pocohontas is like calling a native American tonto or chief; it should be avoided because it is not appropriate, whether or not someone there is offended or not is pretty immaterial--just like calling blacks Sambo or calling hispanics Pancho or Pepe.

Trump said a very stupid thing. He brought up the nickname he has been using for Elizabeth Warren. If he called her "Broken Rubber", I might agree with you.

Big RR wrote:At least extend to them the same courtesy of calling them by their proper name, just as we do to everyone else.

He thought he was being funny. Do you think it would have been more appropriate if Trump had said, "Although, we have a representative in Congress who has been here a long time ... longer than you -- they call her Elizabeth Warren!"?

Warren (and Lemon and others) would be screaming out that Trump is an Ageist. The victim card is being overused and misused. Trump says a lot of stupid things. We don't need to exaggerate or extend the meaning of anything he says.

Lord Jim wrote:Even if her unverified claim to be 1/32nd American Indian is accurate, for a person who is 1/32 anything to try to use that to define them in a way that would give them the right to call themselves a "minority" trivializes the whole concept of "minority" and invites criticism and ridicule...

The Cherokee Nation emphatically disagrees with you, Jim:

Citizenship

Cherokee Nation citizenship law is set by tribal law. There is no minimum blood quantum required for citizenship. Tribal citizenship requires that you have at least one direct ancestor listed on the Dawes Final Rolls, a federal census of those living in the Cherokee Nation that was used to allot Cherokee land to individual citizens in preparation for Oklahoma statehood in 1907.

To be eligible for Cherokee Nation tribal citizenship, you must be able to provide documents that connect you to a direct ancestor listed on one of the Dawes Final Rolls of Citizens of the Cherokee Nation. To be eligible for a federal Certificate Degree of Indian Blood, you must demonstrate through documentation that you descend directly from a person listed on the Dawes’ “by Blood” rolls. This group of census rolls were taken between 1899-1906 of Citizens and Freedmen residing in Indian Territory (now northeastern Oklahoma). If your ancestor did not live in this geographical area during that time period, they will not be listed on the Dawes Rolls.

Source.

If 1/32 (or less) is good enough for the tribe to call you a member, it should be good enough for everyone else. And the Cherokees themselves expressly recognize that there are Cherokee descendants who may not be able to formally trace their lineage due to an accident of geography.

Lord Jim wrote:But I think trying to characterize his referring to Warren as "Pocahantas" as "racist" is pretty thin gruel...

Of course it's racist; Trump was doing nothing other than mocking Warren's claimed ethnic ancestry. If she wants to identify herself as a descendant of Cherokees based on her own family's account of their history, who is Trump to say anything about it? The fact that he even chooses to comment on it is race-baiting and obnoxious. Whether it's "as bad" as other racially/ethnically inflammatory comments he has made is rather beside the point; it's all of a piece with him. And it provides his overtly racist supporters with permission to express their own bigotry in even cruder terms. It's disgusting all around.

I'm sure Don Lemon and others are working hard behind the scenes...

Let me tell you something about Don Lemon...

When it comes to Trump, he does not have clean hands...

Well I remember back after Trump first announced for the Presidency in June of 2015, (and for a number of months after that) Trump was a regular call-in guest to Lemon's show...at one point he was calling in two or three times a week...

Lemon had just gotten his evening show gig on CNN, and having Trump on as a regular guest was good for him to help build up his ratings...

Consequently, Don was a complete pussycat in dealing with Donald, lobbing him softball questions, and never going deep with him on his constant lies or anything else that the press should have been drilling hard on Trump about during this period...(Lemon of course far from the only one who failed in their journalistic responsibilities in dealing with Trump during this period) in order to assure that Trump would continue to call in, and continue to help build his ratings...

It was a relationship that was a win-win for both of them; Trump got a bunch of easy-question free media, and Lemon got increased ratings to help establish his show...

I remember this every time I now see Don Lemon getting on his self-righteous high horse...

1/32 is pretty thin to claim you are a minority? Not within my lifetime here in the USofA. For most of our history in the land of the free and the home of the brave, that was more than enuff to get you legally defined as a negro and with less legal protections than any white male or female.

snailgate

Cherokee Nation citizenship law is set by tribal law. There is no minimum blood quantum required for citizenship.

Well, I can certainly understand why The Cherokee Nation would want to cast as wide a net as possible in allowing people to claim some level of "citizenship" as a Cherokee...(1/32, 1/64, or 1/128, or 1/256)

Call me cynical, but the word "fundraising" comes to mind...

ETA:

Sorry, but when I saw the phrase "Cherokee Nation" I immediately thought of this golden oldie...

Hit it Paul:

He thought he was being funny.

Of course he did; and if he called Obama Sambo, or used another name for another ethnicity, he probably would have thought he was being funny as well--so what? Being funny (even when actual) is not an excuse for being a jerk.

and Jim, sue is correct; and under the ICWA, tribal law as to membership can affect a number of things--ability to be adopted is one. I work with youth services, and in adoption situations an investigation as to native American heritage and possible membership in a ICWA recognized tribe can have an effect on who can or cannot adopt a child (or at least a request for consent of the tribe must be made). A small percent of lineage can have significant effects in some cases.

as for fundraising, what sort of fundraising?

as for Lemon, might he now be the convert in the choir?