How much did it cost, Phil? Was it covered by Obamacare? Any deductibles? And If you were covered by a (truly MA-progressive) universal healthcare plan, did the plan require both birth control and sex change coverage for Mindy?
Mindy for Senate!
Just as smart as most politicians but probably a lot nicer, honest and well mannered.
Too soon!
@ Mike,
Spanish one I made: Pocahontas es Poca-indio (Not much Indian)
I can’t wait until the republican politicians start getting tested and beat Poca-indio’s numbers.
btw, the original analysis and newspapers mentioned 6-10 generations for Poca-Indio, but embedded in the details is that it is most probable 8 generations ago, and Carlos Bustamante then padded it with 2 generations before and after 8, hence the more generous 6-10, but now explanation how that range was figured out.
0.5^8 = 0.00390625 or 0.3 % DNA
thread by Carl Zimmer (author of some of the popular science journalism that was cited to the 1/1024 figure): “@FreemanWSJ concludes—wrongly—that Warren is between “1/64th and 1/1024th” Native American” (https://twitter.com/carlzimmer/status/1052225048336064514) And, from this article by him: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/15/science/elizabeth-warren-native-american.html “Deborah Bolnick, a geneticist at the University of Connecticut who studies Native Americans and was not involved in the analysis, said the Stanford team used well-established methods. “It’s well done,” she said. “It’s consistent with what you might expect if someone had a single ancestor a few generations back.” The 1/1024 thing is easy to make fun of but it’s wrong. That won’t stop anyone though.
If you ever wondered why JFK “Harvard degree but Yale Education” didn’t go to MIT, the reasoning on display in this blog provides a complete explanation.
For reasons unknown Warren decided to list herself as Native American in a form (if I get it correctly it was to ‘connect with like people’). Warren, like heaps of people in the US, can claim one ancestor that was Native. Big deal. She blatantly disregarded the fact she is not enlisted in a Tribal Nation, and that claiming to be Native, without being enlisted, is as inappropriate as Drumpf claiming to be ‘African American’ due to his African descent. When called upon it, Warren should have apologised for the error, and dropped it. Instead, she doubles down. It feels like she wants to prove stupidity beyond reasonable doubt.
I think commentators are a little too quick to reach conclusions negative to Warren. So even if Warren is not really Native American despite her high cheekbones shouldn’t she get some victim credit for wanting to be a member of a minority group, like that white woman a while back who claimed she was African-American? Also her grandfather threw her dad out of the house for marrying her mom, whom gramps thought was Native American, but he was wrong. That should be worth something, no? And what about her recipe for Cherokee Crab Bisque? That should be worth something too. I mean even if she is predominately German or whatever she didn’t contribute a recipe for knockwurst.
For reasons unknown Warren decided to list herself as Native American in a form (if I get it correctly it was to ‘connect with like people’)
I’m sure it wasn’t to gain any kind of career advantage. She is a pure and holy woman without unseemly ambitions and would never do anything for such selfish reasons. She just wanted to connect with her fellow 0.4% Native Americans for fellowship and visits to the sweat lodge.
Federico, I am the owner of a bridge in Brooklyn which I am interested in selling. There is some minor problem with the title documents so I am offering it to you for a price far below its actual value.
Warren is really getting thrown for a loop here. She was expecting, even reveling in the fact that Trump would attack her. If you see the campaign video that she put out with the DNA results, they kept playing Trump calling her Pocahontas – among the Democrat base, being attacked by Trump is validation that she is worthy.
BUT, instead what happened is that she ended up getting attacked from the left – Indian tribes didn’t like her claims, “race is a social construct” folks thought she should not have gotten a DNA test, she is culturally appropriating from the Native Americans, etc. In retrospect this was a really dumb move in today’s environment. White “Beckies” sit very low on the Democrat diversity totem pole – they can still go after white males like Kavanaugh and Trump but in any matchup with people who are “more diverse” they are sure losers. The only thing that she could have done that was worse would be to call the cops on Bustamonte, mistaking him for a prowler when he came to deliver her DNA results.
This is all much ado about almost nothing. She heard stories when she was a kid that there was some American Indian ancestry in her family. So she made claims to having such ancestry. She never claimed to be 100% Indian. There may be 10 million Americans who look completely white who make such claims. So then she took a DNA test which supports her claim, that she’s a white American with a small amount of Indian ancestry.
Apparently the controversy has to do with the fact she checked the wrong box on some forms at some universities that she worked at. The video that she put out earlier this week included statements from faculty at every university that she has worked at saying at that her Indian ancestry claims were not considered at all when she was hired at those institutions. Maybe there intent to derive some career benefit by claiming to be a minority, but there is zero evidence of that. This Harvard Crimson article indicates that she was given tenure at Harvard in 1993 when only 1/10 of the faculty were women and students were agitating for a more diverse faculty. https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2018/5/22/warren-tenure
So there was not even a need to claim to be non-white. Being a white woman was sufficient to earn diversity points. (This is a good time to remember that the most group of people who benefit from affirmative action are women.)
The other interesting thing about this episode is that the final numbers in the Boston Globe article are between 1/64 and 1/1,204. Somehow right wingers on the Internet concluded that that meant that the fraction was 1/1,204. This reminds us of the other right wingers in the Internet who say that liberals aren’t good at math.
Finally, it’s important to remember that this has nothing to with politics. It’s a distraction from actual issues that people say that they care about – immigration, heath care, etc. It makes you wonder where the hatred comes from. Senator Warren often speak in favor of regulating Wall Street as something that would help create a larger, more prosperous, more resilient middle class. Clearly Wall Street doesn’t like that idea. No matter how profitable they are, they always want more profits. They probably don’t like the idea of a large, prosperous middle class. They’d prefer that most of the population to live either in poverty or on the edge of poverty.
Vince: Fixating on the 1/1024 number is for humor purposes, not a serious analysis of the genetic data. I’m in a good mood so I’ll say your description of Senator Warren’s conduct is…extremely charitable. Overflowing with charity. At least to Senator Warren, not to her friends on Wall St. to whom she helped hand out free call options in her previous assignment. I’m also curious as to what she means by “regulating” Wall St, there are a million pages of regulations on the finance industry. How many more do we need to get this large, prosperous, resilient middle class? Why don’t they move to a place where everyone is already living in poverty like Africa, if having most of the population live in poverty is their preference? It’d be much cheaper than buying politicians.
@Vince #14:
> This is all much ado about almost nothing.
But she made it into something by submitting to the DNA test and putting out a video about the whole thing.
> Finally, it’s important to remember that this has nothing to with politics.
Yes it has to do everything about politics. What’s more, she fell to Trump’s bait!!
Again, let me repeat, the most probable number from the analysis is 1/256 (8 generations ago), or 0.3% of her DNA.
@vince, 23andme tells me I’m 1.3% Native American (0.9% Native American and 0.4% East Asian). That means I am potentially 3 times more Native American than Poca-Indio! Can I check the box now?
Sorry to clarify, 3 times more if you consider 0.9% and 4.3 times more if you consider the 1.3% estimate. Oh yeah, and I really like Mexican food.
Fixating on the 1/1024 number is for humor purposes, not a serious analysis of the genetic data.
The problem is that it’s not funny. It’s quite the fail if you can’t make a point or a joke and stay honest (or as you might say, uncharitable) at the same time. You see a lot of this feeble right wing humor on the Internet. The focus on the fraction also raises the question of what fraction would result in a different reaction from the right. If the portion was 1/8, would right wingers on the Internet say that everything was just fine, that there was no problem about the boxes being checked on various forms?
. I’m also curious as to what she means by “regulating” Wall St, there are a million pages of regulations on the finance industry. How many more do we need to get this large, prosperous, resilient middle class?
You can look it up. She’s proposed things on payday lenders and bankruptcy law.
Why don’t they move to a place where everyone is already living in poverty like Africa, if having most of the population live in poverty is their preference?
The goal is ever more profit. Is doesn’t matter hos profitable a corporation is, the management has a responsibility to seek higher profitability. moving to Africa wouldn’t help achieve that goal.
Vince said:
> Senator Warren often speak in favor of regulating Wall Street as > something that would help create a larger, more prosperous, > more resilient middle class. Clearly Wall Street doesn’t like that idea.
Okay, I am with you so far…
> No matter how profitable they are, they always want more profits.
Who doesn’t want more money?
> They probably don’t like the idea of a large, prosperous middle class.
That is clearly wrong. The companies they invest in can’t make money without customers willing to pay for things. Poor people generally don’t have the money to spend on things that are not essential. There is far more profit to be earned from people who have the money to buy nice things.
> They’d prefer that most of the population to live either in poverty or > on the edge of poverty.
And now you are inventing a conspiracy theory. Why on earth would they want that?
It means a population more willing to elect leaders who will tax them.
It means fewer customers who can spend money buying their products.
Poverty reduces educational attainment, meaning fewer people are qualified to work at any skilled job at the companies they own. When fewer people can do the job, they will ask for higher wages.
They are greedy, but they are not stupid. They will not do something that costs them their livelihood.
It’s of course ridiculous to claim you’re Native American with one ancestor within 6-10 generations, but to repeat the point made above, it’s less amusing that Warren manufactured a nice AA-lubricated career from her little pretense.
Wonder if Warren divorced her first husband under tribal law or the White Woman’s law.
Sen. Warren wants to create a large prosperous middle class by robbing the rich and giving it to (the most loyal) poor so that they develop a dependency on that giveaway and vote for her and her buddies.
The rich, of course, have power and both legal and economic options (by definition of what it means to be rich) so the progressives will get squat, not counting for the outrage. But outrage is cheap nowadays. The major political idea is that King Donald is succeeded by Chief Pocahontas, who will milk you for the following 4-8 years. The (loyal) poor will get their circus plus, perhaps, some bread lent by China. So why work if you can tax the rich at 100% and prosper? (given that you are of the right race, gender, and political affiliation)
WTNP, #23: That very thing is way cheaper in Thailand, so why even bother to buy it here from the working class moms? Unless, of course you are either too poor to afford a plane ticket to BKK or too rich so that your time gets super-expensive.
We tested our pawed family member, to see if maybe she was related to Elizabeth Warren. She [the dog] turned out to be 50% German Shepherd, 25% Shiba-Inu and 25% Shar-Pei. Maybe that’s why she didn’t get into Harvard. Still haven’t figured out why Twitter took down her feed tho…
Fake-ajawea
Lie-awatha
Picohontas
Poquitohontas
Faux-cahontas
Fake-ahontas
Shitting Bull
Hoax-ahontas
Homeo-hontas
Failface
Pretendian
I’m sure there are others I haven’t seen.
How much did it cost, Phil?
Was it covered by Obamacare? Any deductibles?
And If you were covered by a (truly MA-progressive) universal healthcare plan, did the plan require both birth control and sex change coverage for Mindy?
Mindy for Senate!
Just as smart as most politicians but probably a lot nicer, honest and well mannered.
Too soon!
@ Mike,
Spanish one I made: Pocahontas es Poca-indio (Not much Indian)
I can’t wait until the republican politicians start getting tested and beat Poca-indio’s numbers.
btw, the original analysis and newspapers mentioned 6-10 generations for Poca-Indio, but embedded in the details is that it is most probable 8 generations ago, and Carlos Bustamante then padded it with 2 generations before and after 8, hence the more generous 6-10, but now explanation how that range was figured out.
0.5^8 = 0.00390625 or 0.3 % DNA
thread by Carl Zimmer (author of some of the popular science journalism that was cited to the 1/1024 figure): “@FreemanWSJ concludes—wrongly—that Warren is between “1/64th and 1/1024th” Native American” (https://twitter.com/carlzimmer/status/1052225048336064514)
And, from this article by him: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/15/science/elizabeth-warren-native-american.html
“Deborah Bolnick, a geneticist at the University of Connecticut who studies Native Americans and was not involved in the analysis, said the Stanford team used well-established methods. “It’s well done,” she said. “It’s consistent with what you might expect if someone had a single ancestor a few generations back.”
The 1/1024 thing is easy to make fun of but it’s wrong. That won’t stop anyone though.
If you ever wondered why JFK “Harvard degree but Yale Education” didn’t go to MIT, the reasoning on display in this blog provides a complete explanation.
For reasons unknown Warren decided to list herself as Native American in a form (if I get it correctly it was to ‘connect with like people’). Warren, like heaps of people in the US, can claim one ancestor that was Native. Big deal. She blatantly disregarded the fact she is not enlisted in a Tribal Nation, and that claiming to be Native, without being enlisted, is as inappropriate as Drumpf claiming to be ‘African American’ due to his African descent. When called upon it, Warren should have apologised for the error, and dropped it. Instead, she doubles down. It feels like she wants to prove stupidity beyond reasonable doubt.
“Remember we said that the Bustamante study said she had 10 times more than the individuals from Utah? That’s the relevant statistic, indicating that her claim to some Native American heritage is much stronger than most European Americans.”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2018/10/18/just-about-everything-youve-read-warren-dna-test-is-wrong/?utm_term=.8f76cb6a9daa
I think commentators are a little too quick to reach conclusions negative to Warren. So even if Warren is not really Native American despite her high cheekbones shouldn’t she get some victim credit for wanting to be a member of a minority group, like that white woman a while back who claimed she was African-American? Also her grandfather threw her dad out of the house for marrying her mom, whom gramps thought was Native American, but he was wrong. That should be worth something, no? And what about her recipe for Cherokee Crab Bisque? That should be worth something too. I mean even if she is predominately German or whatever she didn’t contribute a recipe for knockwurst.
For reasons unknown Warren decided to list herself as Native American in a form (if I get it correctly it was to ‘connect with like people’)
I’m sure it wasn’t to gain any kind of career advantage. She is a pure and holy woman without unseemly ambitions and would never do anything for such selfish reasons. She just wanted to connect with her fellow 0.4% Native Americans for fellowship and visits to the sweat lodge.
Federico, I am the owner of a bridge in Brooklyn which I am interested in selling. There is some minor problem with the title documents so I am offering it to you for a price far below its actual value.
Warren is really getting thrown for a loop here. She was expecting, even reveling in the fact that Trump would attack her. If you see the campaign video that she put out with the DNA results, they kept playing Trump calling her Pocahontas – among the Democrat base, being attacked by Trump is validation that she is worthy.
BUT, instead what happened is that she ended up getting attacked from the left – Indian tribes didn’t like her claims, “race is a social construct” folks thought she should not have gotten a DNA test, she is culturally appropriating from the Native Americans, etc. In retrospect this was a really dumb move in today’s environment. White “Beckies” sit very low on the Democrat diversity totem pole – they can still go after white males like Kavanaugh and Trump but in any matchup with people who are “more diverse” they are sure losers. The only thing that she could have done that was worse would be to call the cops on Bustamonte, mistaking him for a prowler when he came to deliver her DNA results.
This is all much ado about almost nothing. She heard stories when she was a kid that there was some American Indian ancestry in her family. So she made claims to having such ancestry. She never claimed to be 100% Indian. There may be 10 million Americans who look completely white who make such claims. So then she took a DNA test which supports her claim, that she’s a white American with a small amount of Indian ancestry.
Apparently the controversy has to do with the fact she checked the wrong box on some forms at some universities that she worked at. The video that she put out earlier this week included statements from faculty at every university that she has worked at saying at that her Indian ancestry claims were not considered at all when she was hired at those institutions. Maybe there intent to derive some career benefit by claiming to be a minority, but there is zero evidence of that. This Harvard Crimson article indicates that she was given tenure at Harvard in 1993 when only 1/10 of the faculty were women and students were agitating for a more diverse faculty. https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2018/5/22/warren-tenure
So there was not even a need to claim to be non-white. Being a white woman was sufficient to earn diversity points. (This is a good time to remember that the most group of people who benefit from affirmative action are women.)
The other interesting thing about this episode is that the final numbers in the Boston Globe article are between 1/64 and 1/1,204. Somehow right wingers on the Internet concluded that that meant that the fraction was 1/1,204. This reminds us of the other right wingers in the Internet who say that liberals aren’t good at math.
Finally, it’s important to remember that this has nothing to with politics. It’s a distraction from actual issues that people say that they care about – immigration, heath care, etc. It makes you wonder where the hatred comes from. Senator Warren often speak in favor of regulating Wall Street as something that would help create a larger, more prosperous, more resilient middle class. Clearly Wall Street doesn’t like that idea. No matter how profitable they are, they always want more profits. They probably don’t like the idea of a large, prosperous middle class. They’d prefer that most of the population to live either in poverty or on the edge of poverty.
Vince: Fixating on the 1/1024 number is for humor purposes, not a serious analysis of the genetic data. I’m in a good mood so I’ll say your description of Senator Warren’s conduct is…extremely charitable. Overflowing with charity. At least to Senator Warren, not to her friends on Wall St. to whom she helped hand out free call options in her previous assignment. I’m also curious as to what she means by “regulating” Wall St, there are a million pages of regulations on the finance industry. How many more do we need to get this large, prosperous, resilient middle class? Why don’t they move to a place where everyone is already living in poverty like Africa, if having most of the population live in poverty is their preference? It’d be much cheaper than buying politicians.
@Vince #14:
> This is all much ado about almost nothing.
But she made it into something by submitting to the DNA test and putting out a video about the whole thing.
> Finally, it’s important to remember that this has nothing to with politics.
Yes it has to do everything about politics. What’s more, she fell to Trump’s bait!!
Again, let me repeat, the most probable number from the analysis is 1/256 (8 generations ago), or 0.3% of her DNA.
@vince, 23andme tells me I’m 1.3% Native American (0.9% Native American and 0.4% East Asian). That means I am potentially 3 times more Native American than Poca-Indio! Can I check the box now?
Sorry to clarify, 3 times more if you consider 0.9% and 4.3 times more if you consider the 1.3% estimate. Oh yeah, and I really like Mexican food.
Fixating on the 1/1024 number is for humor purposes, not a serious analysis of the genetic data.
The problem is that it’s not funny. It’s quite the fail if you can’t make a point or a joke and stay honest (or as you might say, uncharitable) at the same time. You see a lot of this feeble right wing humor on the Internet. The focus on the fraction also raises the question of what fraction would result in a different reaction from the right. If the portion was 1/8, would right wingers on the Internet say that everything was just fine, that there was no problem about the boxes being checked on various forms?
. I’m also curious as to what she means by “regulating” Wall St, there are a million pages of regulations on the finance industry. How many more do we need to get this large, prosperous, resilient middle class?
You can look it up. She’s proposed things on payday lenders and bankruptcy law.
Why don’t they move to a place where everyone is already living in poverty like Africa, if having most of the population live in poverty is their preference?
The goal is ever more profit. Is doesn’t matter hos profitable a corporation is, the management has a responsibility to seek higher profitability. moving to Africa wouldn’t help achieve that goal.
Vince said:
> Senator Warren often speak in favor of regulating Wall Street as
> something that would help create a larger, more prosperous,
> more resilient middle class. Clearly Wall Street doesn’t like that idea.
Okay, I am with you so far…
> No matter how profitable they are, they always want more profits.
Who doesn’t want more money?
> They probably don’t like the idea of a large, prosperous middle class.
That is clearly wrong. The companies they invest in can’t make money without customers willing to pay for things. Poor people generally don’t have the money to spend on things that are not essential. There is far more profit to be earned from people who have the money to buy nice things.
> They’d prefer that most of the population to live either in poverty or
> on the edge of poverty.
And now you are inventing a conspiracy theory. Why on earth would they want that?
It means a population more willing to elect leaders who will tax them.
It means fewer customers who can spend money buying their products.
Poverty reduces educational attainment, meaning fewer people are qualified to work at any skilled job at the companies they own. When fewer people can do the job, they will ask for higher wages.
They are greedy, but they are not stupid. They will not do something that costs them their livelihood.
It’s of course ridiculous to claim you’re Native American with one ancestor within 6-10 generations, but to repeat the point made above, it’s less amusing that Warren manufactured a nice AA-lubricated career from her little pretense.
Wonder if Warren divorced her first husband under tribal law or the White Woman’s law.
Sen. Warren wants to create a large prosperous middle class by robbing the rich and giving it to (the most loyal) poor so that they develop a dependency on that giveaway and vote for her and her buddies.
The rich, of course, have power and both legal and economic options (by definition of what it means to be rich) so the progressives will get squat, not counting for the outrage. But outrage is cheap nowadays. The major political idea is that King Donald is succeeded by Chief Pocahontas, who will milk you for the following 4-8 years. The (loyal) poor will get their circus plus, perhaps, some bread lent by China. So why work if you can tax the rich at 100% and prosper? (given that you are of the right race, gender, and political affiliation)
WTNP, #23: That very thing is way cheaper in Thailand, so why even bother to buy it here from the working class moms? Unless, of course you are either too poor to afford a plane ticket to BKK or too rich so that your time gets super-expensive.
We tested our pawed family member, to see if maybe she was related to Elizabeth Warren. She [the dog] turned out to be 50% German Shepherd, 25% Shiba-Inu and 25% Shar-Pei. Maybe that’s why she didn’t get into Harvard. Still haven’t figured out why Twitter took down her feed tho…