• Donald Trump tweets 'Pocahontas' racist slur about senator Elizabeth Warren
    139 replies, posted
[quote=sgman91]If I were aware of the context? No, of course I wouldn't be offended because I look at intent, and the intent is clearly to insult Warren's dishonesty, not Native Americans.[/quote] You are an astonishing individual - I really mean that. Not that you're something great or something. You literally astonish me. I am presently sitting here, trying to follow the train of thought that would lead you to state the sentence you've just written legitimately - and I'm getting already lost in a maze of frantic hand-waving and either willful ignorance or just plain a 'filter laid on top of reality'. It nonetheless insults Native Americans, of which she claims to be, because it's a stereotype - much like 'Cletus'. Might as well call an old japanese woman 'Baba Yaga' and be surprised when she gets offended. Trump levies insults all the time. This was an insult. The context was and remains: This was an insult that was intended to insult - and not insult her 'dishonesty' either. Was Trump attacking a reporter's integrity or his disability when he said this? (The answer is both but I think both you and I know you'll state 'nah he was just attacking his integrity' right?) [media]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PX9reO3QnUA[/media]
Sgman, you made the claim that she was lying about her heritage, the burden of proof thus falls on you to prove that assertation.
[QUOTE=Firgof Umbra;52851798]You are an astonishing individual - I really mean that. Not that you're something great or something. You literally astonish me. I am presently sitting here, trying to follow the train of thought that would lead you to state the sentence you've just written legitimately - and I'm getting already lost in a maze of frantic hand-waving and either willful ignorance or just plain a 'filter laid on top of reality'. It nonetheless insults Native Americans, of which she claims to be, because it's a stereotype - much like 'Cletus'. Might as well call an old japanese woman 'Baba Yaga' and be surprised when she gets offended. Trump levies insults all the time. This was an insult. The context was and remains: This was an insult that was intended to insult.[/QUOTE] Of course it was an insult. I literally said it was an insult in the post you quoted. The disagreement is in what he was insulting. I say he's insult Warren's dishonesty, and you're all saying his insult was also racially directed at Native Americans generally.
[QUOTE=sgman91;52851864]Of course it was an insult. I literally said it was an insult in the post you quoted. The disagreement is in what he was insulting. I say he's insult Warren's dishonesty, and you're all saying his insult was also racially directed at Native Americans generally.[/QUOTE] You say this like it can't be intended as an insult both ways at the same time - see the video above. What you're saying is 'it can't be a racist insult because [I]I refuse to see it as racist[/I]'. Unfortunately, that's not how things work. It is up to the race in question whether they're offended or not; it isn't [I]up to you[/I] whether his insult was directed at Native Americans generally because it was directed at them generally - and in particular for exactly the reason you've been claiming this whole while : 'she claims to be Native American'.
[QUOTE=sgman91;52851864]Of course it was an insult. I literally said it was an insult in the post you quoted. The disagreement is in what he was insulting. I say he's insult Warren's dishonesty, and you're all saying his insult was also racially directed at Native Americans generally.[/QUOTE] Picking out race for no reason sure does scream "not racist"
[QUOTE=sgman91;52851864]Of course it was an insult. I literally said it was an insult in the post you quoted. The disagreement is in what he was insulting. I say he's insult Warren's dishonesty, and you're all saying his insult was also racially directed at Native Americans generally.[/QUOTE] The best way I know to explain it is this: Remember Rachel Dolezal? She's a civil rights activist who claimed to be Black, but was actually totally white. She has been publicly proven to be a liar. Mockingly calling her "Rosa Parks" is both fucked up and racist.
[QUOTE=Amber902;52851840]Sgman, you made the claim that she was lying about her heritage, the burden of proof thus falls on you to prove that assertation.[/QUOTE] To be honest, whether she is or is not Native American is irrelevant. The INTENT of the joke is that she isn't actually Native American. Hell, let's say he's totally wrong and she ends up being Native American... the intent of the joke doesn't change. It just means the joke was based on something false. The statement is either racist or it isn't, whether she is or is not Native American. The key is that Trump doesn't think she is, and the comment is based on that assumption. With all that said, the assumption is based on the fact that she can't prove her heritage. She can't provide the burden of proof for her initial claim. So people are justified in dismissing it.
[QUOTE]The INTENT of the joke is that she isn't actually Native American. [/QUOTE] How do you know what Trump's intent is?
[QUOTE=sgman91;52851888]To be honest, whether she is or is not Native American is irrelevant. The INTENT of the joke is that she isn't actually Native American. Hell, let's say he's totally wrong and she ends up being Native American... the intent of the joke doesn't change. It just means the joke was based on something false. The statement is either racist or it isn't, whether she is or is not Native American. The key is that Trump doesn't think she is, and the comment is based on that assumption. With all that said, the assumption is based on the fact that she can't prove her heritage. She can't provide the burden of proof for her initial claim. So people are justified in dismissing it.[/QUOTE] the "intent" of the "joke" does not change anything
[QUOTE=sgman91;52851864]Of course it was an insult. I literally said it was an insult in the post you quoted. The disagreement is in what he was insulting. I say he's insult Warren's dishonesty, and you're all saying his insult was also racially directed at Native Americans generally.[/QUOTE] Had he insulted her by calling her a liar of some kind, then we would agree with you. By calling her Pocahontas it is undebatable that it is racist and yet somehow you're trying to debate it.
Trump declares November as National Native American Heritage month then does this [url]https://thinkprogress.org/trump-warren-pocahontas-bdfb856e31a6/[/url] A complete and utter lack of class.
Absolutely pathetic. Bafoons should have no place in running nations into the ground and treating everyone he doesnt agree with like dirt.
[QUOTE=Asaratha;52851896]you keep claiming she's been dishonest, but you haven't provided a single link (that i've seen) to prove your point, probably because that's a pretty fuckin hard thing to prove. you can not believe her, sure, but to straight up say she's lying is a stretch without providing links to back your argument. i would also like to see any links to Trump doubting her heritage, because if he hasn't in the past, it's pretty clear he's directly going for it as a way to be condescending & racist[/QUOTE] Here's a WaPo article that goes into the whole thing: [URL]https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2016/06/28/why-donald-trump-calls-elizabeth-warren-pocahontas/?utm_term=.e6433c43f325[/URL] It cites Trump as saying: "[I]“Crooked Hillary is wheeling out one of the least productive senators in the U.S. Senate, goofy Elizabeth Warren, who lied on heritage.” (from June 2016)[/I]
I mean, the man declares the month "Native American Heritage Month" and then says this. It's pretty plain on the face of it exactly what he meant by it, sgman91.
[QUOTE=Alec W;52851899]the "intent" of the "joke" does not change anything[/QUOTE] Of course it does. Intent is everything when it comes to racism. That's why comics can make extremely racial jokes without being accused of racism, everyone recognizes the intent isn't to be racist. [editline]3rd November 2017[/editline] [QUOTE=Firgof Umbra;52851923]I mean, the man declares the month "Native American Heritage Month" and then says this. It's pretty plain on the face of it exactly what he meant by it, sgman91.[/QUOTE] He's been saying this about Warren since like June of 2016.
[QUOTE=sgman91;52851925]Of course it does. Intent is everything when it comes to racism. That's why comics can make extremely racial jokes without being accused of racism, everyone recognizes the intent isn't to be racist. [editline]3rd November 2017[/editline] He's been saying this about Warren since like June of 2016.[/QUOTE] A racist joke is still racism.
[QUOTE=sgman91;52851925]Of course it does. Intent is everything when it comes to racism. That's why comics can make extremely racial jokes without being accused of racism, everyone recognizes the intent isn't to be racist. [editline]3rd November 2017[/editline] He's been saying this about Warren since like June of 2016.[/QUOTE] And he [I]said it after declaring the theme of this month, again[/I]. I'm not stating this is new. I'm stating that this has a context that you're refusing to see. Or, rather, even if you saw it that you're refusing to admit it either because you 'don't believe it's a context' or you 'don't believe it can be a context'. I mean is this going to be how things are with you from now on? Are you just going to be 'that guy who's tortuously contentious about anything that has anything to do with Trump'?
[QUOTE=sgman91;52851919]Here's a WaPo article that goes into the whole thing: [URL]https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2016/06/28/why-donald-trump-calls-elizabeth-warren-pocahontas/?utm_term=.e6433c43f325[/URL] It cites Trump as saying: "[I]“Crooked Hillary is wheeling out one of the least productive senators in the U.S. Senate, goofy Elizabeth Warren, who lied on heritage.”[/I][/QUOTE] Did you read it? Or just post it? It does go into it, yes, but it doesn't say "She lied". I doubt her claims, but to quote the regulations around this [QUOTE]But even were such a document to be found, Warren would not be eligible to enroll as a Cherokee based on it alone. To begin with, the Cherokee Nation doesn't accept marriage licenses as documentation of Cherokee ancestry -- let alone a document described as an application for a marriage license by a descendent of the individual claimed as Cherokee.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE]None of this to say that a Cherokee citizen couldn't look like Warren. Though it confounds many people's expectations, the Cherokee Nation considers being Cherokee as much an ethnicity as anything racial, and given the tribe's centuries-long history of intermarriage there are many Cherokee citizens today who do not look stereotypically Native American. As well, "there are a lot of folks who are legitimately Cherokee who are not eligible for citizenship," said Krehbiel-Burton, because, for example, their ancestors lived in distant states or territories when the rolls were drawn up, or because they are direct descendants of people left off the rolls for other reasons. Fractional Native American ancestry is quite hard to prove to the standards of the U.S. government, which in many ways acts as the ultimate "birther" in this regard. Percentage of ancestry or "blood quantum" -- the creepy and antique-sounding term used by the Bureau of Indian Affairs, which certifies it for two of the three Cherokee tribes -- is recognized by the Bureau based on original documents (such as birth certificates, Census records, and death certificates) through something called a Certificate of Degree of Indian Blood, or CDIB.[/QUOTE] It almost seems like you're taking the point of the article and running with it further than it would permit [editline]3rd November 2017[/editline] [QUOTE=sgman91;52851919]Here's a WaPo article that goes into the whole thing: [URL]https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2016/06/28/why-donald-trump-calls-elizabeth-warren-pocahontas/?utm_term=.e6433c43f325[/URL] It cites Trump as saying: "[I]“Crooked Hillary is wheeling out one of the least productive senators in the U.S. Senate, goofy Elizabeth Warren, who lied on heritage.” (from June 2016)[/I][/QUOTE] And even then, all you're doing is taking a Giant Talking Tangerine and saying "He's got the facts on this". No he fucking doesn't. He's just as in the dark as you, probably more so to be honest. He's using it as an attack because he's a lazy thoughtless fucking hack. You're running with it for some unknown reason.
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;52851947]Did you read it? Or just post it? It does go into it, yes, but it doesn't say "She lied". I doubt her claims, but to quote the regulations around this It almost seems like you're taking the point of the article and running with it further than it would permit[/QUOTE] She was listed by her employer as a minority. Where do you think they got that info from? ([url]https://www.politico.com/story/2012/05/warren-cited-as-minority-at-u-penn-076200[/url])
[QUOTE=Hell-met;52851375]one is a kids cartoon and the other is a president[/QUOTE] uhh Pocahontas was an actual person, [url]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pocahontas[/url] also as the above said, how is calling her Pocahontas any different from calling someone a stereotypical name of a certain race. it is stupid as fuck.
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;52851947]And even then, all you're doing is taking a Giant Talking Tangerine and saying "He's got the facts on this". No he fucking doesn't. He's just as in the dark as you, probably more so to be honest. He's using it as an attack because he's a lazy thoughtless fucking hack. You're running with it for some unknown reason.[/QUOTE] I think people are justified in doubting Warren's claims of being Native American, but that isn't, and hasn't been, the focus of my argument in this thread. My point, from the beginning, has been that the statement isn't racist, and that argument doesn't rest on whether she is actually native American or not.
[QUOTE=sgman91;52851959]She was listed by her employer as a minority. Where do you think they got that info from? ([url]https://www.politico.com/story/2012/05/warren-cited-as-minority-at-u-penn-076200[/url])[/QUOTE] So are you just linking tangential pieces at this point? In no way does this support your character attack on her. You can't prove she's lying. I don't believe her either, but I'm not calling her a liar. You are, and you have. This isn't proof of that. You understand that, yes? [editline]3rd November 2017[/editline] [QUOTE=sgman91;52851964]I think people are justified in doubting Warren's claims of being Native American, but that isn't, and hasn't been, the focus of my argument in this thread. My point, from the beginning, has been that the statement isn't racist, and that argument doesn't rest on whether she is actually native American or not.[/QUOTE] Trump's attacks bring up race and whatever facet he can attack a person on. It's based upon a predication of race, either perceived or real, which in either event is an example of racism.
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;52851966]So are you just linking tangential pieces at this point? In no way does this support your character attack on her. You can't prove she's lying. I don't believe her either, but I'm not calling her a liar. You are, and you have. This isn't proof of that. You understand that, yes?[/QUOTE] I'm not trying to prove that she's lying. So, cool, we can go past that now. Also, people are justified in publically doubting her claims when she can't provide any burden of proof for them. As I've said multiple times, whether or not she's lying is irrelevant to whether the statement is racist. Trump doesn't think she is, as shown by his previous statements. That is the intent of the accusation.
[QUOTE=sgman91;52851964]I think people are justified in doubting Warren's claims of being Native American, but that isn't, and hasn't been, the focus of my argument in this thread. My point, from the beginning, has been that the statement isn't racist, and that argument doesn't rest on whether she is actually native American or not.[/QUOTE] Your point is implicitly defeated by the fact that the ones who would be targeted by the racism are the ones who get to determine 'what is or isn't racist'. You want Native American opinion on this? Here you go. [quote=Indian Country Media Network]Even if Warren lied about being Cherokee, it doesn’t give Trump a pass here, according to many Native Americans who have found Trump’s latest and past name-calling to be offensive. Some have said that Trump is using the word Pocahontas in a way that evokes a slur, such as “squaw,” to taunt the senator. And no one believes he is honoring her. “I think he definitely says it as a slur,” Jacqueline Pata, executive director of the National Congress of American Indians, told The New York Times last year after then-candidate Trump had once again used the name to describe Warren. “No matter how he feels about Elizabeth Warren, to throw that out there is disrespectful to real Native Americans.”[/quote]
[QUOTE=Firgof Umbra;52851975]Your point is implicitly defeated by the fact that the ones who would be targeted by the racism are the ones who get to determine 'what is or isn't racist'. You want Native American opinion on this? Here you go.[/QUOTE] I fundamentally disagree. Racism has a definition, and it isn't based on the people listening. A racist statement is racist, even if no one hears it, and vice versa, a non-racist statement isn't racist no matter who hears it.
[QUOTE=sgman91;52851989]I fundamentally disagree. [B]Racism has a definition, and it isn't based on the people listening.[/B][/QUOTE] I would love to say a lot of things to you right now that are not very polite - especially because you're basically saying 'No, [I]I[/I] get to tell people what's racist.' Instead I will simply say: [B][U][I]W O W[/I][/U][/B] [quote]A racist statement is racist, even if no one hears it, and vice versa, a non-racist statement isn't racist no matter who hears it.[/quote] Native Americans have said it's a racist slur in the way he uses it. By your own definition you must state that therefore what Trump stated is racist. To state beyond this point 'it isn't racist' is to declare yourself the arbiter of what people are offended by. But go on, state it. Astonish me again. Tell me that 'it's still not racist'.
Fact is, if someone claimed to be 1/16 African American and I decided to call them "Tyrone" sarcastically to make fun of that idea, it would still make me a racist. No matter how you try and spin what his "intent" was, Trump blatantly said something racist.
[QUOTE=sgman91;52851989]I fundamentally disagree. Racism has a definition, and it isn't based on the people listening.[/QUOTE] He's using race as a tool to degrade people, regardless of her "status" as a Native, Trump, the highest power in the land is using race as a bludgeon. And you say "Not racist". Cool. That's not how this works and I don't really think you give a toss enough to actually make effort to make the logical connections people are asking you to. [editline]3rd November 2017[/editline] This is just typical Cletus.
[QUOTE=sgman91;52851723]1) Am I claiming to be black or African American? 2) Cletus is a stereotypical black name, not a real, and extremely well known and liked person in history. A better example might be saying, "Look at Reverend King over here," to a white guy claiming to be African American.[/QUOTE] You make mental gymnastics a high art
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;52851998]He's using race as a tool to degrade people, regardless of her "status" as a Native, Trump, the highest power in the land is using race as a bludgeon. And you say "Not racist".[/QUOTE] I actually don't know what you're saying. He's not saying, "You're native American and it's dumb." In fact, he's not making any negative statement about anything Native American It's only racial because the nature of her initial claim is racial. If she would have claimed to be ancestors of great baseball players, then Trump might have called her "Babe Ruth." Trump didn't make it racial. The claim by Warren is inherently racial.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.