Twice Scott Brown and Elizabeth Warren have faced off in televised debates, and twice the Massachusetts Senate candidates traded blows over Warren’s claim to American Indian ancestry within seconds of the opening bell. The Republican incumbent and his Democratic challenger have launched dueling campaign ads calling even more attention to the issue, and there has even been a mini-kerfuffle over the low-rent antics of a few Brown staff members, who were filmed war-whooping and tomahawk-chopping at a campaign event in Dorchester.
Plainly the question of Warren’s Cherokee heritage isn’t going away any time soon. I’ll be surprised if she and Brown don’t sink their teeth into it again when they meet for Debate No. 3 in Springfield on Wednesday.
Comments
Jeff's next article will be about why colleges should use test scores only for all college admissions and for all civil service exams.
This comment has been removed.
Isn't it time to have affirmative action based upon social class, not race? Why should the two privileged and lovely daughters of the Obamas have an advantage over the children of a white factory worker? Why should the son of an NBA millionaire go to the head of the line?
This comment has been removed.
How about affirmative action based on abilities? Make it illegal to question people about their race or finances. Find out if they are the most qualified and capable to do the job. Period.
Jeff Jacoby is not a student history or quoting people exactly. He studies the memos and papers from "scholars" at the Heritage Foundation. He then writes a column. Today is another example of his borrowed musings from the Koch brothers, Coors, and the Mellons, all sponsors of the right wing noise machine. To set some things straight let's put his statements and assumptions as they occur in reality. Elizabeth Warren did not make the observation that an ancestor of hers "had high cheek bones" etc. She was told this by one of her relatives as a child. Affirmative action does not mean taking unqualified applicants into a position but allows an opportunity they would not have had otherwise. It has added to the strength of this nation, not weakened it. Mr. Jacoby then jumps to some stated belief that racial equality has been achieved. The 21st centurly indeed is now but racial blindness is still not with us. Prof Warren had taught and done distinguished works at 4 law schools before she joined the faculty of U. of Pa Law School and Harvard, 1987 and 1992, respectively. She was 40 years old at the first, and 45 at the second. She was a recognized authority in her field of work before she took either of those positions. Mr. Jacoby prefers to ignore this and repeat hogwash. Does he also think women have the same opportunities as men in the 21st century? Somehow he is a closet supporter of the status quo in spite of the fact that racism is still very much alive in this country. He certainly must know this kind of discrimination exists. He would have to live in a cave not to notice. So the more important question is, why he choosing to hide it?
This comment has been removed.
My comments were neither Democrat or Republican. It was about Mr. Jacoby's baseless assertion that bigotry is a thing of the past where it really counts, namely getting a solid education, a good job or profession, and to be represented in the leadership of this country. Your screed contains enough hate for anyone. I have no compunction to add to it.
Let's apply this race neutral policy to the middle east where we apply different policies to one race versus others.
Aren't they all the same race?
The whole issue is about her character. Only she knows why she pretended to be an Indian, but without question, our "affirtmative action" culture creates serious advantages to those who are minority. That legitimately raises the question of her true intent. What if someone who is lilly white and blue eyed, but who has a great, great great grandparent who was black? Should that person be the beneficiary of affirmative action preferences?
I would say, no. But this example, and Elizabeth Warren's story raise the question of whether racial preferences really should exist. In my opinion, they discriminate against whites, and should NOT exist.
She never pretended to be Native American. She believe then, and believes now, that she is.
Jeff,
you completely miss what this controvery is about.
It is not about Warren's heritage, whether real or imagined, who cares?
It is about EEO reporting, the cornerstone of the Federal government's, and Harvard's, gargauntuan affirmitive action efforts.
EEO reporting has a very specific rule for self-reporting as an American Indian, which is "Persons having origins in any of the original peoples of North and South America, (including Central American) and who maintains tribal affiliation or community attachment." You can't check this off based on family lore, nor even on actually having an Indian grand-parent. I bet you saw this language when you were hired at the Globe.
What do we know? We know that Harvard reported Warren as Indian American in their EEO reports. We know the EEO reports are based on the EEO form an employee fills out at hiring time. We know Warren DOES NOT in any stretch meet the Indian American requirement. Any person following the evidence knows Warren identified herself as Indian American so the diversity whirldwind of the 90's (take a lok at all the Rudenstine publications on Harvard's hiring efforts...) would pull her into a place like Harvard, which on her personal merits would be denied her.
Pretty sleazy behavior and solid material for a major controversy.
The commttee that hired her at Harvard, even a member of Bush's administration, said that the hiring committee did not know about her heritage. So, how did that influence the decision? There is not one shred of evidence that the people hiring were influence by her heritage. If you have a bone to pick with EEO, then blame Harvard, not Brown.
What Jacoby calls the "contemporary diversity industry" is the rest of society refusing to return to the policies of racial discrimination that the contemporary Republican party continues to represent. If he really believed in an end to racial discrimination, he would call for an end to the current Republican voter suppression efforts. The post-Jacoby era at the Globe can't start soon enough...
This comment has been removed.
THE AUTHOR STATES, "Martin Luther King memorably dreamed of a nation in which people would be judged by the content of their character, not the color of their skin. In much of American life today, his dream has become real." The worst part about this piece is that Jacoby seriously believes in these arguments. Denial ain't a river in Egypt...
You can't be 31/32 white and claim to be a minority. It is not legal!!! And lots of us have Indian blood. You don't see the rest of us checking the box and taking opportunity away from those it was intended for!! Democrats, of all people, should understand her sin, and why she is disqualified!!
Elizabeth Warren has been shown to be ZERO percent minority. Also, she doesn't meet the standard for affirmative action because she hasn't participated in the Native American community.
Again, none of what you say is true or has any relation go what Warren has said in reply to Brown's accusations. First, her family heritage is what it is, and has nothing to to do with the law. Second, no one has proven anything about her family heritage, much less that it is zero percent of anything. The fact is, she grew with folklore about her family, which she took to be true, like most kids. Whether it is actually true or not is no more relevant than the folklore and traditions of anyone's family, many of which are not fully documented, if at all. Native American heritage is notoriously difficult to document for obvious reasons, the first being that most mixed blood people who were born to a Native American parent tended to hide the fact if they were trying to live amongs non-Native Americans.
Anyway, facts like this are not likely to convince anyone who has an agenda such as yours. But I state them for others' benefit.
Next debate PLEASE Mr/Ms moderator, ask Elizabeth Warren if she favors affirmative action and why. Ask her what the standards should be for qualifying for affirmative action.
This comment has been removed.
What part of Jeff's suggestion, that we all stop judging, rewarding or condemning anyone because of race, don't some posters understand? Seems an obviously good idea to me. Would love to hear the response of both candidates to his question.
The Democrats know what the "heritage issue" is all about when the topic is related to Prof. Warren: It has everything to do with lying for personal gain, which has occured in this situation.
Harvard University counted Prof. Warren as a "minority" hire. The question then becomes - who benefited more? Harvard University benefits from the hiring of Ms. Warren as a 'minority prof' & Ms. Warren climbs the career ladder. Also, lets not forget she divorced her previous husband to marry a Harvard professor during this hiring period.
The Democrat politicians are playing their game of repeating lies in the hope that voters will start thnking their lies are true. Democrats & Ms. Warren act as if they are too stupid to understand the issue.
This comment has been removed.