Law review article on diversity: "Harvard Law School hired its first woman of color, Elizabeth Warren, in 1995."

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from massmoderateJoe. Show massmoderateJoe's posts

    Re: Law review article on diversity: "Harvard Law School hired its first woman of color, Elizabeth Warren, in 1995."

    In Response to Re: Law review article on diversity: "Harvard Law School hired its first woman of color, Elizabeth Warren, in 1995.":
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Law review article on diversity: "Harvard Law School hired its first woman of color, Elizabeth Warren, in 1995." : In the most minute way possible, and as it turned out, unnecessary.  She's not a renown expert in tax law because of that slip-up; she's an expert in spite of it, which is what I'm talking about. I was told by my mom that I have Irish ancestors.  I have no idea who they were, where they lived or even how irish they were.  If I use that bit of hearsay data to converse with someone at a pub or during a client interview, and that leads to a business opportunity for my firm, then I'm also exploiting a heritage which may or may not be true. Ultimately though, it doesn't matter as long as I do my job, please the client and fix their problem.   This article is also hearsay, in that sense. As I said elsewhere, this is all pretty much bull***t.
    Posted by MattyScornD[/QUOTE]

    Did you check off your Irish ancestry to get an advantage in school applications, scholarship or employment?  Did you check ancestry.com or Ellis Island for your relatives.  I have and found ancestors passing through Ellis Island, in the late 1800's and early 1900's.

    The New England Geneology Society stated that they found nothing to support Warren's claim of 1/32 Cherokee ancestry, except some receipes she submitted to her cousin's cook book called Pow Wow Chow, now that's a hoot.

    I'm not a supporter of affirmative action as I see it as reverse discrimination, but if someone is a supporter and they fraudulently use it for their personal benefit I thinks it's shameful and it says a lot about their character.
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from Reubenhop. Show Reubenhop's posts

    Re: Law review article on diversity: "Harvard Law School hired its first woman of color, Elizabeth Warren, in 1995."

    In Response to Re: Law review article on diversity: "Harvard Law School hired its first woman of color, Elizabeth Warren, in 1995.":
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Law review article on diversity: "Harvard Law School hired its first woman of color, Elizabeth Warren, in 1995." : Did you check off your Irish ancestry to get an advantage in school applications, scholarship or employment?  Did you check ancestry.com or Ellis Island for your relatives.  I have and found ancestors passing through Ellis Island, in the late 1800's and early 1900's. The New England Geneology Society stated that they found nothing to support Warren's claim of 1/32 Cherokee ancestry, except some receipes she submitted to her cousin's cook book called Pow Wow Chow, now that's a hoot. I'm not a supporter of affirmative action as I see it as reverse discrimination, but if someone is a supporter and they fraudulently use it for their personal benefit I thinks it's shameful and it says a lot about their character.
    Posted by massmoderateJoe[/QUOTE]

    The allegation of fraud you make against Warren is a fraud. You have no proof that she knew she had no Cherokee ancestry and sought to establish that she did. Stop lying false moderate.
     
  3. This post has been removed.

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from Reubenhop. Show Reubenhop's posts

    Re: Law review article on diversity: "Harvard Law School hired its first woman of color, Elizabeth Warren, in 1995."

    In Response to Re: Law review article on diversity: "Harvard Law School hired its first woman of color, Elizabeth Warren, in 1995.":
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Law review article on diversity: "Harvard Law School hired its first woman of color, Elizabeth Warren, in 1995." : Oh come on. How often do you check Native American on applications? Everyone knows their heritage. But for sake of argument...if you weren't sure should you be checking off things you're not sure about? "Oh there's an option for Native American...well...I guess there's a chance I might have that it my heritage...oh what the heck...I'll check it off."
    Posted by WhichOnesPink2[/QUOTE]

    Oh come on indeed.  Most everyone gets knowledge of their family heritage through one's family.  She was told she was part Cherokee and there is supposedly a marriage application out there to reflect it.  What else do you expect for her to do? Much, much more apparently.... like.... well...

    And this scenario far different than the false moderate's opinion that she committed a fraud and intentionally misled people to believe something she knew was not true.  There is no evidence of that.
     
  5. This post has been removed.

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from doozy-day. Show doozy-day's posts

    Re: Law review article on diversity: "Harvard Law School hired its first woman of color, Elizabeth Warren, in 1995."

    In Response to Re: Law review article on diversity: "Harvard Law School hired its first woman of color, Elizabeth Warren, in 1995.":
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Law review article on diversity: "Harvard Law School hired its first woman of color, Elizabeth Warren, in 1995." : Oh come on indeed.  Most everyone gets knowledge of their family heritage through one's family.  She was told she was part Cherokee and there is supposedly a marriage application out there to reflect it.  What else do you expect for her to do? Much, much more apparently.... like.... well... And this scenario far different than the false moderate's opinion that she committed a fraud and intentionally misled people to believe something she knew was not true.  There is no evidence of that.
    Posted by Reubenhop[/QUOTE]

    Republican or Democrat, if there is politaical gain at stake, there is intent.

    I thought you were a lawyer?

    don't be dense on purpose.........
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from andiejen. Show andiejen's posts

    Re: Law review article on diversity: "Harvard Law School hired its first woman of color, Elizabeth Warren, in 1995."

    In Response to Re: Law review article on diversity: "Harvard Law School hired its first woman of color, Elizabeth Warren, in 1995.":
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Law review article on diversity: "Harvard Law School hired its first woman of color, Elizabeth Warren, in 1995." : Republican or Democrat, if there is politaical gain at stake, there is intent. I thought you were a lawyer? don't be dense on purpose.........
    Posted by doozy-day[/QUOTE]

    doozy-day:

    Reuben is talking about intent in checking the box as a native American when Warren was applying to be a professor.

    What in the world are you doing saying there was political...not politaical...gain at stake at that time?

    Reuben is anything but dense. As for you....

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from Reubenhop. Show Reubenhop's posts

    Re: Law review article on diversity: "Harvard Law School hired its first woman of color, Elizabeth Warren, in 1995."

    In Response to Re: Law review article on diversity: "Harvard Law School hired its first woman of color, Elizabeth Warren, in 1995.":
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Law review article on diversity: "Harvard Law School hired its first woman of color, Elizabeth Warren, in 1995." : Republican or Democrat, if there is politaical gain at stake, there is intent. I thought you were a lawyer? don't be dense on purpose.........
    Posted by doozy-day[/QUOTE]

    Don't be ignorant.  Guilty until proven innocent is the wrong idea to support.  Just because you would do it does not mean eveyone would do it.
     
  9. This post has been removed.

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from Reubenhop. Show Reubenhop's posts

    Re: Law review article on diversity: "Harvard Law School hired its first woman of color, Elizabeth Warren, in 1995."

    In Response to Re: Law review article on diversity: "Harvard Law School hired its first woman of color, Elizabeth Warren, in 1995.":
    [QUOTE]Just ask yourself if Sarah Palin had done something similar as granny warren had what these zipper heads would be writing about her. Think matty would be mentioning the inherent wrights of oppressed people in the same sentence as Palin? Ha - another exercise in complete hypocrisy.
    Posted by TFefio[/QUOTE]

    Now we are guessing what people would say about hypotheticals.  That should lead to a very intelligent conversation.

    By the way are you dismissive about Romney's bullying prank?  I am sure if Obama did the same thing you would hypocritically rail at his lack of character.  See: the conversation goes no where.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: Law review article on diversity: "Harvard Law School hired its first woman of color, Elizabeth Warren, in 1995."

    In Response to Re: Law review article on diversity: "Harvard Law School hired its first woman of color, Elizabeth Warren, in 1995.":
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Law review article on diversity: "Harvard Law School hired its first woman of color, Elizabeth Warren, in 1995." : Yes, but this is so common that it's like driving through a yellow light; nobody is immune and everyone has done. In the same way that Mitt Romney exploits his status as a wealthy, elite, white man... ...or Scott Brown exploits his good looks or his likewise modest upbringing. None of these examples matter much except in which they obscure the competence they bring to the job and their accomplishments therein, and in all three instances, that is not the case.
    Posted by MattyScornD[/QUOTE]

    Did Romney lie about being a white man?

    Did Romney illegally claim to be something he is not?

    You seem unable to make a distinction between using your gifts to your own good, and lying about your gifts for personal gain.
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: Law review article on diversity: "Harvard Law School hired its first woman of color, Elizabeth Warren, in 1995."

    In Response to Re: Law review article on diversity: "Harvard Law School hired its first woman of color, Elizabeth Warren, in 1995.":
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Law review article on diversity: "Harvard Law School hired its first woman of color, Elizabeth Warren, in 1995." : In the most minute way possible, and as it turned out, unnecessary.  She's not a renown expert in tax law because of that slip-up; she's an expert in spite of it, which is what I'm talking about. I was told by my mom that I have Irish ancestors.  I have no idea who they were, where they lived or even how irish they were.  If I use that bit of hearsay data to converse with someone at a pub or during a client interview, and that leads to a business opportunity for my firm, then I'm also exploiting a heritage which may or may not be true. Ultimately though, it doesn't matter as long as I do my job, please the client and fix their problem.   This article is also hearsay, in that sense. As I said elsewhere, this is all pretty much bull***t.
    Posted by MattyScornD[/QUOTE]


    So, lying about your credentials is OK, as long as you get something out of it?

    Got it.  This is why liberalism fails.
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: Law review article on diversity: "Harvard Law School hired its first woman of color, Elizabeth Warren, in 1995."

    In Response to Re: Law review article on diversity: "Harvard Law School hired its first woman of color, Elizabeth Warren, in 1995.":
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Law review article on diversity: "Harvard Law School hired its first woman of color, Elizabeth Warren, in 1995." : doozy-day: Reuben is talking about intent in checking the box as a native American when Warren was applying to be a professor. What in the world are you doing saying there was political...not politaical...gain at stake at that time? Reuben is anything but dense. As for you....
    Posted by andiejen[/QUOTE]

    Nothing to see here, move along... LOOK!!! ROMNEY PUT A DOG ON HIS CAR ROOF!!!
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from andiejen. Show andiejen's posts

    Re: Law review article on diversity: "Harvard Law School hired its first woman of color, Elizabeth Warren, in 1995."

    In Response to Re: Law review article on diversity: "Harvard Law School hired its first woman of color, Elizabeth Warren, in 1995.":
    [QUOTE]Just ask yourself if Sarah Palin had done something similar as granny warren had what these zipper heads would be writing about her. Think matty would be mentioning the inherent wrights of oppressed people in the same sentence as Palin? Ha - another exercise in complete hypocrisy.
    Posted by TFefio[/QUOTE]

    TFefio:

    Gee, I had a post here last night. Went something like this.

    Why do we have to be here if you asked and answered your own question as to what Matty would do?

    As for "granny", Warren is 10 years older than Brown. As for their IQs, I do not know, but I will speculate that Warren's is far higher then 10 points over Brown's.
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from andiejen. Show andiejen's posts

    Re: Law review article on diversity: "Harvard Law School hired its first woman of color, Elizabeth Warren, in 1995."

    In Response to Re: Law review article on diversity: "Harvard Law School hired its first woman of color, Elizabeth Warren, in 1995.":
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Law review article on diversity: "Harvard Law School hired its first woman of color, Elizabeth Warren, in 1995." : Nothing to see here, move along... LOOK!!! ROMNEY PUT A DOG ON HIS CAR ROOF!!!
    Posted by skeeter20[/QUOTE]

    skeeter:

    Not you too. Did you read Reuben's post carefully. This doozy whatever referred to political gain when Warren checked the box for native American when she applied to be a professor at Harvard, the world of academia.

    doozy went off about political gain at that moment in history. Warren was not in politics, she was a professor looking to change schools. I know your reading comprehension is better then whoever doozy is.
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from andiejen. Show andiejen's posts

    Re: Law review article on diversity: "Harvard Law School hired its first woman of color, Elizabeth Warren, in 1995."

    In Response to Re: Law review article on diversity: "Harvard Law School hired its first woman of color, Elizabeth Warren, in 1995.":
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Law review article on diversity: "Harvard Law School hired its first woman of color, Elizabeth Warren, in 1995." : So, lying about your credentials is OK, as long as you get something out of it? Got it.  This is why liberalism fails.
    Posted by skeeter20[/QUOTE]

    skeeter:

    Putting aside whether Warren lied or not skeeter, lying about one's credentials has nothing to do with liberalism or conservatism.

    Liberals lie about it. Conservatives lie about it. Everybody does not lie about it, but people of all sorts of labels lie about it. It is totally irrelevant what label you may or may not come under.
     
  17. This post has been removed.

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from andiejen. Show andiejen's posts

    Re: Law review article on diversity: "Harvard Law School hired its first woman of color, Elizabeth Warren, in 1995."

    In Response to Re: Law review article on diversity: "Harvard Law School hired its first woman of color, Elizabeth Warren, in 1995.":
    [QUOTE]As for "granny", Warren is 10 years older than Brown.   Holy crap...only 10? Yikes! As for their IQs, I do not know, but I will speculate that Warren's is far higher then 10 points over Brown's. Hahaha...based on???
    Posted by WhichOnesPink2[/QUOTE]

    I wrote I was speculating, yes? So based on her accomplishments, on her writings on hearing her speak versus Brown's accomplishments, not really any writing to go on and hearing him speak for starters.

    And btw, why do you laugh in your posts? I have never seen the best posters in the forums do that. Reuben, Damian, Matty for example.
     
  19. This post has been removed.

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from andiejen. Show andiejen's posts

    Re: Law review article on diversity: "Harvard Law School hired its first woman of color, Elizabeth Warren, in 1995."

    In Response to Re: Law review article on diversity: "Harvard Law School hired its first woman of color, Elizabeth Warren, in 1995.":
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Law review article on diversity: "Harvard Law School hired its first woman of color, Elizabeth Warren, in 1995." : "I wrote I was speculating, yes?" Um...yes you did. You do realize that even when one speculates it has to be based on something right? Therefore why I asked "based on?" What in God's name does laughing or not laughing have to do with what others post???? Sigh
    Posted by WhichOnesPink2[/QUOTE]

    And I answered what I based my speculation upon.

    Still have not answered why you laugh in your posts. You put the laughs in there. You are the only one who can give a reason why.

    Also, your "yikes" from before regarding Warren. I gather you were inferring that they look much more than 10 years apart. Even if that were true, what does looks have to do with being a good senator? Maybe a good male model? But we are not electing a model are we?
     
  21. This post has been removed.

     
  22. This post has been removed.

     
  23. This post has been removed.

     
  24. This post has been removed.

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from andiejen. Show andiejen's posts

    Re: Law review article on diversity: "Harvard Law School hired its first woman of color, Elizabeth Warren, in 1995."

    In Response to Re: Law review article on diversity: "Harvard Law School hired its first woman of color, Elizabeth Warren, in 1995.":
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Law review article on diversity: "Harvard Law School hired its first woman of color, Elizabeth Warren, in 1995." : I gather you were inferring that they look much more than 10 years apart. Even if that were true, what does looks have to do with being a good senator? Maybe a good male model? But we are not electing a model are we? Ok...THIS would be why I laugh. It's comical that you think because I think she looks older than she is that it is somehow tied to whether or not she'd be a good senator. NOWHERE did I utter such nonsense. YET somehow you ASSumed that. Not in my wildest imagination would I ever think how a person looks would reflect how they'd be as a senator. But apparently you could think such nonsense. Very telling!
    Posted by WhichOnesPink2[/QUOTE]

    Try again.  Your laugh were directed at their IQ points. Read your own post.

    Very telling you cannot remember or at least scroll up so your post will make some sense.

    Then again, do not try for me. I have given you a wide berth. I have not nor do I intend to engage you anytime soon. Nothing but nothing ever comes out of our interactions.

    I can talk to any other poster in the forums except you. At this point in time I am not going to waste my diminished time and energy doing so. The forums will be better off and so will I.
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share