The point I made in comments today was confirmed in a quote at Newsweek of an official of the Cherokee Nation:
After Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren took a DNA test to determine if she had Native American ancestry, a Cherokee Nation official responded, calling such a test “useless.†In a statement, Cherokee Nation Secretary of State Chuck Hoskin Jr. said the test was “not evidence for tribal affiliation.â€
Warren released a DNA test on Monday showing that while the vast majority of her ancestry was European, there was “strong evidence” of Native American ancestry, “likely in the range of six to 10 generations ago.”
“A DNA test is useless to determine tribal citizenship,†Hoskin Jr. said in response. “Sovereign tribal nations set their own legal requirements for citizenship, and while DNA tests can be used to determine lineage, such as paternity to an individual, it is not evidence for tribal affiliation.â€
Hoskin Jr. went on to say that the use of a DNA test was “inappropriate and wrong.â€
The point here is that, while the Republicans especially President Trump are wrong to mock Elizabeth Warren for claiming Indian ancestry it is also wrong for Elizabeth Warren to claim Indian ancestry on the basis of what little information she has and even more wrong if she used that claim to gain special privileges.
American Indians are among the very poorest Americans and the most deserving of a leg up from the federal government. Arrogating programs intended to give such a leg up is a scandal and an outrage.
Precisely. This is Bad Trump behaving badly. But to deny Warren and her advocates have not behaved shamefully is fantasy. Your buddy Doug disgraced himself with his anti-conservative rant at OTB. And what in the world is she doing right now? Seeking to ward off her personal political problem I guess. Very selfish.
It’s one thing to believe you have XX blood in you, and act on that. It’s another to have it proven that you do not, and instead of admitting it and apologizing go off on a tirade blaming everybody but yourself. And she may not even be 1/64 Indian, the samples used for comparison came from Central and South America whose populations usually (but not always) have strong admixtures of ‘native’ blood in them. But without verification of THOSE genes, for all we know they could have well been from almost pureblood Castilians. Why were there no North American Indian samples available to compare? Sounds very strange and suspicious.