[Charlie Southerland]

The Birther BS was about where Obama was born not what his race was. It was obvious that he was of mixed race. So, let's throw that one out the window.

Had Ms. Warren not applied as an "woman of color" Native American heritage 1/32 Cherokee, there would be no issue involved at all. Ignorance is bliss, I guess. There are obvious and simple ways to prove that her high cheekbones either were or were not Indian inspired. Since she was so proud of her heritage, it would seem likely that proving it when she became an adult would have been prudent and very helpful on her part. In some places, being as little as 1/64th Native American gives one tribal status and a check every month from good ol' Uncle Sam. No one begrudges that. Native Americans (real Native Americans) have earned that right and distinction for all that they have suffered at the hands of whites. Whatever they are paid, it isn't enough.

And if bragging about being a Native American when one either does not know or is speculating that one is an Indian until BS is called makes one smart enough to become a US Senator, the bar is set pretty low, not withstanding the political jackal, whoever he/she might be that exposed Ms. Warren. Seems one would want to sew up the Native American vote if one was related to an Indian tribe. She couldn't explain it enough to convince Geronimo's Great-Grandson and others. They won't vote for her and are either mad about it or are laughing their collective butts off and mocking her. (Liawatha) and such with her Pow Wow Cookbook. Hell, I'm related to some English Kings, but I ain't claimin' the Crown Jewels. Oh, I can prove my heritage. There was a blood test.

Kids believe myths all the time. That doesn't make it so. Sooner or later one has to grow up. Having an adolescent in the Senate isn't conducive to good governance. Give her a headdress and a Bigwheel and she'll play ball.

I'm sure myself and the other genius here on this thread could use all the help we can get mopping the floor. I, for one, would welcome it. Floor mopping is no longer exclusively women's work. Perhaps it never was. I hope Ms. Warren is a good strong woman.

About that Hispanic woman; if she is the same one I heard about yesterday, she stole someone else's identity to get a job and was convicted of a felony some time ago. I guess she is being deported back to Mehico not very far away where her children are free to join her. It's not like we have the Berlin Wall along our southern border. People can go back and forth as long as they have the proper documents or a really good Coyote.

I am proud that I could collaborate with the previous post so that 2 sides might be presented of an important issue. It ain't Woodward and Bernstein, but it'll do.

Mr. Trump will be vindicated soon enough. That's why 60 million people voted for him. All of them bigots, of course.

[Nigel Mace]

I find your style in prose somewhat opaque, Charlie - but your drift would appear to be that the serious content of a Senator's critique of the Trump Presidency's Executive Orders and of his Cabinet nominations are to be vitiated becasue she may have gained minor political advantage (though your latest post seems to undermine that point) through some uncorrected romancing some years back about her family's origins.

If that is all, I do not see that you have made any relevant points at all.
The weakness of your position is only emphasised by the manner in which, to alien eyes, you appear to be making it.

[Charlie Southerland]

Nigel, I was pointing out the hypocrisy of the left/democrats in general, and the fact that Ms Warren didn't give a rip about Sessions qualifications or his possible failings, they would most certainly try to destroy any politician with an R beside their name. More specifically, and to the point is that Sessions hasn't been caught in a lie as Ms. Warren has. And if the moccasin were on the other foot and Ms. Warren were being vetted by the Senate, the Republicans would not have treated her that way. It seems that none of you care about any of that, you only wish to destroy your own countrymen and ours wish to destroy our own countrymen for no good reason apparent other than you hate May and our 50% hate Trump. It's a difficult way to govern. Ms. Warren's native American claims are indicative and the proximate cause of this, in a nutshell. Like I said earlier, I don't care if she's related to Superman. It's all about the Left's hypocrisy. Why is that so hard for you to understand? Weak? Nope.

[Andrew Mandelbaum]

This a waste of time. I say poetry should be the arbiter here. This struggle is a century in the making. Bring the poetry of both sides out and see what rings hollow. I will go first posting a poem of resistance to the Right then Charlie or maybe John can post something for the Republican/Brexit sort of dreamworld Maybe some Pound from one his radio broadcasts might work?
Of course there is always some stuff over at Counter Currents that will do if you lads get in a pinch.

To Federico García Lorca

I.

He was seen walking among rifles,
down the long street,
leaving for the cold of the countryside
with the morning stars still bright overhead.

They killed Federico
at the break of day.
The assassins never dared
to look him in the face:
each of them had his eyes shut tight.
“God won’t save you!” they shouted,
and Federico fell dead—
blood on his clothes, lead in his back . . .
Let it be known that the crime was done in Granada
--poor Granada--in his Granada.


II. The poet and death

He was seen walking alone with her,
unafraid of her sickle.
--The sun was already lighting the towers;
hammers were sounding--striking and clanging in the forges.
Federico spoke to her,
playing up to death. She was listening.
“You’ve made my verses ring, my dear,
with the clapping of your dry hands.
You’ve put ice into my song and honed
my tragedies on your scythe of silver,
so I will sing to you of the flesh you don’t have,
the eyes you have lost,
the hair that the wind took away,
the red lips where you used to kiss.
Today, as always, oh Gypsy, my death,
how good to be alone with you
in these breezes of Granada, of my Granada!"


III.

He was seen walking . . .
friends, let us make
a monument for the poet in the Alhambra
out of stone and dreams
above a fountain where the water grieves
and says to anyone who hears it:
the crime was done in Granada, in his Granada!

Antonio Machado, 1936
Translated by Frank Beck

[Charlie Southerland]

What does Pound have to do with this and who is Counter Currents? I suppose you already know. Please elucidate.

[Roger Slater]

I can understand the Senate having a rule that you shouldn't attack your fellow Senators. This makes sense when, as is true 99.99% of the time, the subject of the debate isn't precisely the question of the whether a given Senator has the requisite character and qualifications to be confirmed. It strikes me as bizarre to say during a debate about a Senator's qualifications that criticism of that Senator is out of bounds. Senate collegiality ought not to mean that the Senate should automatically confirm the nomination of anyone who happens to be a Senator at the time of his nomination, right? And if you agree, I don't see how you can use rules of Senate collegiality to prohibit extreme criticism of a nominee.

I'd also note that the letter that Warren wanted to read was a letter that was already in the official Senate record from an earlier confirmation hearing in which the Senate rejected a prior Sessions nomination on a bipartisan basis.

[Nigel Mace]

You are probaly right, Andrew and the effort is hardly worth making, however....

Charlie, one minor, alleged and hypocritical act, somewhat remote in time from the current dispute, does not make any case at all of alleged general applicabiliy. Your assault on Warren does not address any of her critique of Sessions. It is simply mud-slinging - and the ripeness and/or reality of irrelevant mud does not elevate it above that.

I would be interested where you find that I desire to destroy anyone, let alone my "countrymen" - whether, Scots, British or European. If you cannot identify such a place, I would appreciate it if you would withdraw the accusation.

May, however, is busy on a project which, as a matter of economic fact, is set to have seriously negative consequences for millions of my fellow "countrymen", measured in terms of any of these three groups. That is one of the reasons - among many more, all open to rational debate - why I detest what she is doing and why I will work flat-out when the new independence referendum comes to break free of a UK, of which I was once, many decades ago, so proud, and which she and her party are dismantling. The 'destroying' of its "union" is, ironically, very much at the centre of the, doubtless unintended, consequences of her actions.

[Charlie Southerland]

I don't consider it an accusation, Nigel. I have seen John Whitworth castigated, mocked and ridiculed for his opinions. You and others are quick to say he is a wonderful poet, but...

You are free to do that as long as John doesn't mind, and John seems to handle his business with much aplomb. But it does get old. One would think that a contemporary poet of John's caliber would be more respected all around.

If it is all in good fun between you, then certainly, I withdraw my remarks. I maintain that such repeated acts does have at least a residual effect on ones reputation and possibly their book sales. And John has yet to stand for an political office. Imagine if he did.


I agree with you Bob, 100%. Extreme criticism is different than demeaning a colleague with whom you've worked for some years and likely haven't had the balls to accuse him to his face at any time prior to.

The problem with the letter is that there are accusation that cannot be confirmed, only denied. That's a nasty business to my mind. Attorneys at Law have a code to live by too. I have found that the majority of attorneys violate their pledge when they wake up in the morning. How to pick a good one for the SC? I don't know.

[Andrew Frisardi]

But Charlie, if hypocrisy is the new integrity the Trumpkins are way out in front.

Take the b.s. they're slinging about the Yemen raid. Spicer says:

"It’s absolutely a success. And I think anyone who would suggest it’s not a success [he's referring here most of all to John McCain] does disservice to the life of Chief Ryan Owens. He fought knowing what was at stake in that mission.

Yet by Trump's own standards--having said during the campaign that McCain wasn't a true war hero because he got caught--Ryan Owens must be a real loser because he got killed.

Shamelessness is the new pride, and the Trumpkins are proud to show it.

Btw, about your doubt that millions of people might be bigots or at least tacitly support blatant bigotry and racism: you betch'ya it can happen, bit by bit little by little the laws and institutions can be tailored to fit the "alternative truth." And before long, people are lining up for the stuff. Try Fascist Italy. It happened, it really did.

[Brian Allgar]

Charlie, I'll leave the vitriolic accusations based on Trumpian "alternative truth" to you. I prefer to try to determine the facts.

"In April 2012, the Boston Herald sparked a campaign controversy when it reported that from 1986 to 1995 Warren had listed herself as a minority in the Association of American Law Schools (AALS) directories. Harvard Law School had publicized her minority status in response to criticisms about a lack of faculty diversity, but Warren said that she was unaware of this until she read about it in a newspaper during the 2012 election. Scott Brown, her Republican opponent in the Senate race, speculatedxtthat she had fabricated Native American heritage to gain advantage in the job market. Former colleagues and supervisors at universities where she had worked stated that Warren's ancestry played no role in her hiring. Warren responded to the allegations, saying that she had self-identified as a minority in the directories in order to meet others with similar tribal roots. Her brothers defended her, stating that they "grew up listening to our mother and grandmother and other relatives talk about our family's Cherokee and Delaware heritage". In her 2014 autobiography, Warren described the allegations as untrue and hurtful. The New England Historic Genealogical Society found a family newsletter that alluded to a marriage license application that listed Elizabeth Warren’s great-great-great grandmother as a Cherokee, but could not find the primary document and found no proof of her descent. The Oklahoma Historical Society said that finding a definitive answer about Native American heritage can be difficult because of intermarriage and deliberate avoidance of registration."

So it seems evident that Elizabeth Warren has good reason to believe that she has Cherokee blood - or do you think that the mention of a marriage license application (even if the primary document can't be found) listing her great-great-great-grandmother as a Cherokee was a lie planted many generations earlier in case the as-yet unborn Elizabeth might find it useful some day?

On reflection, knowing you, you're probably able to convince yourself that that's exactly what happened.