Trump's racist "Pocahontas" label

Some initial thoughts on Donald Trump's tagging Sen. Elizabeth Warren with the racist label "Pocahontas":

Trump questions whether Elizabeth Warren is Native American amid feud

Trump's casual racism toward Native Americans

Donald Trump's Pocahontas comment draws objection from Calgary writer

Donald Trump Shrugs Off Calls by Native Americans to Apologize for ‘Pocahontas’ Jokes

Trump’s Very Use of Pocahontas’s Name Is Disrespectful

Elizabeth Warren May Not Be Native American, But That Doesn’t Make Donald Trump Right

Column: Pocahontas' reality vs. Donald Trump's racialized misogyny

Trump’s Last Stand

Cody and Warren, Indian wannabes

A long posting discusses Iron Eyes Cody, possibly the most famous Indian wannabe in history. It goes on to talk about Elizabeth Warren and why people exaggerate or invent an Indian identity.

Why Do So Many People Pretend to Be Native American?

By Russell CobbIron Eyes Cody may have been a Hollywood Indian, but there’s more to the tribe than show business.

There are many subcategories of Wannabes, but the most common member of the tribe we might call the Almost Native—the white person who claims one-sixteenth blood quantum, just enough to squeak by America’s arbitrary racial standards that designate who is and is not a minority.

The most famous and most controversial Almost Native of the moment is Oklahoma City-born Elizabeth Warren, who is rumored to be a candidate for president in 2016. During her 2012 campaign for the U.S. Senate in Massachusetts against incumbent Senator Scott Brown, Warren frequently described “family lore” about her Cherokee forbearers as part of her hardscrabble, coming-of-age story. Conservatives mocked her for identifying herself as a “Native American” minority during two stints at law schools in the 1990s. While it appears that she never benefited from affirmative action for minorities and stopped listing herself as a minority lawyer by 1995, she has refused to back away from claims of Native ancestry.

When Warren’s claims to Cherokee ancestry were scrutinized closely by genealogists, no one could find her ancestors among those named on the Dawes Roll, which the government intended to be a master list of Cherokee surnames, finalized in 1906. (Although they did find one ancestor during territorial days who had actually boasted of killing a Cherokee.) Like many dubious narratives of whites passing for Native, Warren’s story takes many twists and turns, some of which receive a gloss in her new memoir, A Fighting Chance. In the book, Warren weaves her “Native American heritage” (specific references to the Cherokee have now disappeared) into a narrative of working-class struggle, with her “mamaw and papaw” handing down stories and recipes from their days in Indian Territory.

And then there’s Aunt Bee, who told Liz Warren that her papaw had inherited high cheekbones from his Indian ancestors but did not passed them down to the little girl. It’s all part of a home-spun narrative of authentic Americana: Daddy worked hard as a janitor, but had a heart attack and couldn’t pay the medical bills. Mama was devoted to her family, but sometimes didn’t have enough money to put food on the table for the four kids. Eventually, little Liz had to work, too, before she dropped out of college at age 19 to support her husband’s professional goals. Then she picked herself up by her bootstraps and put herself through law school in the wake of a divorce. It’s like a PG-rated Loretta Lynn or Tammy Wynette song with all the cheating and drinking purged from the storylines.

A lot of people scoffed at fair-skinned, blue-eyed Warren’s claim of Native American heritage. But, as an Okie myself, I instantly recognized the narrative. It has an undeniable pull and a certain degree of truthiness, as Stephen Colbert would say. The mythic Native ancestor in the white settler family lends a folksy, feel-good element to a narrative of colonization, exploitation, and plunder.

Warren "hurt" by Cherokee controversy

Elizabeth Warren: ‘I was hurt, and I was angry’

By MJ LeePerhaps the most hurtful and high-profile attack thrown against Warren by Brown had to do with her heritage.

At the height of the 2012 campaign, it was reported that Warren had listed herself as having Native American roots at Harvard University. Soon, there was a “full-blown campaign frenzy,” Warren recalls, with Republicans demanding that she prove her Native-American roots and accusing her of getting her job at the elite university by making false claims about her personal background.

Caught off-guard, Warren admits that she “fumbled” when reporters first asked her about the controversy.

Things only got worse when the Brown campaign asked whether her parents had lied to their children about her family. “He attacked my dead parents,” Warren writes. “I was hurt, and I was angry.”

Brown’s allegation that Warren had used her background to get ahead “simply wasn’t true,” she writes. “I was stunned by the attacks.”

Warren devotes a section of her book—called “Native American”—to this controversy, explaining that she had simply grown up learning about her Native American background from her family and that as a kid, she had never questioned her family’s stories or asked for documentation.

“Everyone on our mother’s side—aunts, uncles, and grandparents—talked openly about their Native American ancestry,” she wrote. “My brothers and I grew up on stories about our grandfather building one-room schoolhouses and about our grandparents’ courtship and their early lives together in Indian Territory.”Hits on ancestry claims angered Elizabeth Warren

New book recounts controversy

By Bob McGovernU.S. Sen. Elizabeth Warren recounts in her new autobiography that she was “hurt” and “angry” by news reports that there was no documentation to support her claims of her family’s Cherokee heritage in the 2012 Senate race, according to a published report.

“What really threw me, though, were the constant attacks from the other side,” Warren wrote, according to Politico.com, which received an advance copy of Warren’s book, “A Fighting Chance,” due to be released April 22.

“I would almost persuade myself that I was starting to get the hang of full-throttle campaigning and then—bam! Out of left field, the state Republican Party, or the Scott Brown campaign, or some blogger, would launch a rocket at me,” Warren wrote.

The Herald first reported that Indian tribes had no record of membership by Warren, and that genealogists were unable to confirm any Native American heritage. It later emerged that Warren had listed herself as a minority in the nation’s leading directory of law professors for a period of a decade as she moved up in academia, and she was ultimately cited by Harvard University as a minority hire.

Facts contradict claims

Cherokee women want to meet Elizabeth Warren on book tour

To get Warren to understand why they are hurt and angry that she assumed, then discarded, Native American identity.

By William A. JacobsonWarren will be launching a nationwide book tour. Someone who wants to meet Warren is Twila Barnes.

Barnes is the Cherokee Genealogist whose groundbreaking genealogical research exposed the falsehood to Warren’s claims. Barnes and her team of Cherokee genealogists traced Warren’s family lines back to the early 1800s and documented that Warren’s family not only was not Cherokee or other Native American, but also that they never lived as such.Elizabeth Warren History of 'Minority Status' Listings at Odds with New Book's Claims

By Michael Patrick LeahySenator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) writes in her new book, A Fighting Chance, scheduled for release on Tuesday, that "I never asked for special treatment when I applied to college, to law school, or for jobs." But a mountain of factual evidence contradicts that assertion.

As far back as 1986, while she was still a professor at the University of Texas Law School, Senator Warren consciously requested special treatment by falsely self-identifying as a "Minority Law Teacher." Her request for special treatment began with information she provided that was published in the 1986-1987 Association of American Law Schools (AALS) Directory of Faculty.And:"Why would Elizabeth Warren, who never suffered an ounce of discrimination on the basis of her alleged Native American status, whose parents, grandparents, great grandparents, and great great grandparents also suffered no such discrimination, feel justified in claiming such status, which she must have known would accrue to her benefit even if such benefit were not provable?" Jacobson asked.

Breitbart's Pollak reported in May 2012 that despite Senator Warren's claim she wanted to "meet other people with tribal roots," she never attended or participated in a single event sponsored by Harvard University's Native American Program (HUNAP) at Harvard Law School before or after she landed a job there.Comment:  Boo-hoo! Warren's feelings were hurt!

Well, so were the feelings of the Natives who tried to interview her, to get her to talk about the controversy. She refused every overture to explain her alleged Cherokee ancestry. So no one should feel sorry for her.

Apparently she wrote an entire chapter on the subject, but literally said nothing new. She was simply repeating her family stories, she says again, with no curiosity about whether they were true or not. One has to wonder if someone this thoughtless has the right temperament to be senator...or president.

It's extremely well-known throughout Indian country that people claim Cherokee ancestry with little or no evidence. But Warren the "Native" is as naive and ignorant as a child about this problem. Like every Indian wannabe of the last century, she never considered genealogy or DNA to verify her claims. She was happy just "playing Indian."

But that's not the only issue. She didn't just acknowledge her alleged Native roots. She actively claimed to be Native for decades. She used it in her professional career.

You normally can't do that unless you're enrolled in a tribe. If you're not enrolled, perhaps you can do it if you're substantially Native by blood--e.g., one-fourth or more. Neither of these conditions applies to Warren.

So why did she claim to be not merely of Native heritage, but flat-out Native? And why has she stopped making the claim? Why isn't she proudly declaring herself Native at every opportunity if she is, indeed, proud of being Native?

These are the type of questions Warren can't or won't answer. And that's why critics won't let her get away with her flimsy claims.

For more on Elizabeth Warren, see Delaune: Politicans Ignore Native Concerns and My Thoughts on Brown vs. Warren.



(Apologies for whoever misspelled "determined" in this image.)

DeLaune: Politicians ignore Native concerns

After criticizing Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) for her alleged grandstanding, a columnist notes her indifference to Native issues:

Elizabeth Warren, Heidi Heitkamp, Markwayne Mullin and Us

By Cole R. DeLauneNow, even more disturbing anecdotes have emerged regarding the antagonism Warren and her staff continues to display toward Natives. According to Lisa Begay, an Arizona activist and member of the grassroots organization Reservation Rats, “Last week, six Narragansetts who helped her during the election went back and forth between Rhode Island, Massachusetts, and DC trying to meet the Senator. She did not even give them the time of day. Her staff didn't bother to reply to their emails either.”

Sadly, such disregard is symptomatic of the prevalent attitude among DC's elite when it comes to indigenous peoples. Heidi Heitkamp declared her desire to be a "voice" for "Indian Country" when she needed every vote she could muster in a hotly contested race against Rick Berg. And although her margin of victory in that election is conventionally attributed to the backing she amassed among the nations of North Dakota, the freshman Senator has largely ignored their objections to the construction of the Keystone pipeline. In recent weeks, she joined 16 other Democrats in a symbolic filibuster-proof affirmation of the TransCanada project authored by John Hoeven.

Perhaps most irresponsibly, Congressman Markwayne Mullin of Oklahoma's 2nd District prioritized his antipathy toward gays, lesbians, and other sexual minorities above his support for VAWA. As a member of the CNO, the Westville rancher co-authored a resolution with Chickasaw citizen Tom Cole to strengthen language in the legislation pertaining to questions of tribal jurisdiction, but was ultimately willing to jettison what progress was accomplished for indigenous women because of "details" concerning LGBT concessions in other articles of the bill. Talk about tunnel vision.Comment:  Like Elizabeth Warren, Heidi Heitkamp is a Democrat. Markwayne Mullin is a Republican.

For more on Elizabeth Warren, see "Not an Indian" Sign for Brown and Brown Is "Bay State Birther".

Dennis Miller slurs Sacheen Littlefeather

A Recent TV Slur Revives Debate About Sacheen Littlefeather and Her Role in Marlon Brando’s Oscar Refusal

By Dina Gilio-WhitakerHistory was made in 1973 when Marlon Brando declined to accept the best actor Oscar for his role in The Godfather to protest the treatment of American Indians. His demurral, which was delivered on stage by a young Native American activist named Sacheen Littlefeather, generated intense controversy and criticism throughout the country. Almost 40 years later, some in Hollywood still seem to hold a grudge.

The subject came up on the August 27 airing of NBC’s Tonight Show while host Jay Leno was talking to comic and FOX-friendly pundit Dennis Miller. The conversation turned to Massachusetts senatorial candidate Elizabeth Warren:

Miller: Elizabeth Warren? Is that the chick that says she’s an Indian?

Leno [chuckling]: Well, yeah, no.

Miller: She’s about as much Indian as that stripper chick Brando sent to pick up his Oscar for The Godfather, all right?

Leno: Check that reference! Hang on, you mean Shawsheen [sic] Littlefeather?

Miller [audience laughter]: Sacheen Littlefeather. Of course I remember!

Leno: 1971 was that? Oh my God!

Miller: You know, I sent the Warren campaign a donation today, but just to piss her off I sent it in beads.

Miller’s comments—and the laughing audience—are glaring reminders that ugly Native American stereotypes are still pervasive. A few weeks after Miller’s appearance with Leno, staffers for Senator Scott Brown, Warren’s opponent, were taped doing tomahawk chops and war whoops as they mocked her campaign. Racial slurs that deny a person’s Native American heritage are a peculiar type of racism, and all the better when the target is a woman, especially one as high profile as Elizabeth Warren or Sacheen Littlefeather.And:The biggest lie told by the media was that she was not an Indian, a misconception that is still surprisingly persistent today, as demonstrated by the Leno-Miller exchange. Miller’s reference to her as a “stripper” was a further attempt to discredit her, a deliberate exaggeration that probably referenced a photo shoot she had done for Playboy the year before her appearance on the Academy Awards. “I am not a stripper,” she says. “People pay me to keep my clothes on! [laughing] I’m 65 years old and an elder now, going to the other side soon. I was young and dumb [when I did the photo shoot].… It was shot in 1972, with nine other Indian women whose names I won’t disclose to protect their privacy.”

The spread, which was to have been called “10 Little Indians,” was killed by Playboy editors because of the Wounded Knee confrontation. But a year later the magazine ran the shots of Littlefeather, who had by then rocketed to fame.And:The Leno-Miller segment about Littlefeather mostly escaped the notice of the media, but that’s partly because she deliberately delayed responding to it. She is surviving a battle with breast cancer just this year, having only recently been officially declared in remission. “Having cancer has been the fight of my life. Staring death in the face changes your life,” she says. “Late-night TV has stooped to racism and bigotry. [Miller and Leno] came off as bitter, old white farts. Would they have gotten away with it if they had referred to Oprah as Aunt Jemima?”Comment:  For more on the subject, see Littlefeather Fought for Native Actors.

"Not an Indian" sign for Brown

Controversy Over Haverhill Scott Brown ‘Not An Indian’ SignA political sign is sparking controversy in Haverhill.

A businessman put up a sign on his building that reads, “Re-elect Scott Brown, Lt. Col US Army, not an Indian.”

He says the sign refers to Elizabeth Warren’s claim that she’s part Native American.

But the Greater Haverhill Civil Rights Commission is demanding the sign be taken down, saying it’s insulting to Native Americans and casts a negative light on the city.

“What if it read, “Vote for mitt Romney, not the black? Or vote for Barack Obama, not the Mormon? This particular sign does convey hate, commission member Rabbi Ira Korinow said. “It just doesn’t belong in our community,”

But John Caruso, the man who put up the sign, is adamant that the sign stay in place.

He says the sign wasn’t meant to be offensive to anyone other than Elizabeth Warren, and it’s about freedom of speech.

“If someone feels that I have insulted them, I apologize for hurting their feelings. But I think you need to look at the sign more closely and understand it doesn’t have anything to do being an Indian. It has to do with honesty and integrity, explaining out that one person has honesty and integrity and the other person has demonstrated she does not,” he said. “If I had one regret, it’s that I probably should have put ‘not a fake Indian, alluding to the fact that Liz Warren did claim at one point in time to be an Indian.’”

The Brown campaign has reportedly requested that Caruso take down the sign. Citing free speech, the city says it doesn’t have the power to order Caruso to do so.

Comment:  This sign is a Freudian slip that reveals what Caruso and his ilk really think.

Conservatives like them dislike "elitists," liberals, and minorities with a passion. They consider them part of the 47% who are takers, not givers. Conservatives think these people sit around mooching off the government and dreaming up ways to take money from "real Americans."

Caruso's slip was posting "not an Indian" rather than "not a fake Indian." To Caruso and company, it's a valid criticism either way. If Warren is a fake Indian, she's dishonest. If she's a real Indian, she's also dishonest. Because Indians are part of the 47% who supposedly want free handouts from the government.

This kind of thinking is behind the racist war whoops, tomahawk chops, and ethnic slurs directed at Warren. Again, being an Indian and pretending to be one are roughly the same thing to her critics. Either way, they believe she's outside the American norm. She's a skulking thief, attacking people with affirmative action claims, stealing jobs from their rightful owners.

Indian or fake Indian?

Whether she's an Indian or not makes only a minor difference. When her claims went unsubstantiated, conservatives could vent their racist rage at her. Since she seemed to be white, they could mock her with racist gibes. Like countless hipsters in headdresses, they could claim their racism was "ironic" or "satirical."

If she had substantiated her identity, conservatives would've had to halt the overt racism. They would've had to disguise their racist rage. Instead, they would've taunted her with the same insinuations they used against Obama. She doesn't share "our" values...doesn't understand America...has a "foreign" outlook...etc.

We saw how this conservative racism played out in the Bono Mack case. Bono Mack called her Latino opponent un-American simply for supporting Indians against the mainstream culture. That's similar to the criticism Obama has received, and it's what Warren would've received if she'd proved she was an Indian.

So thanks, Caruso, for revealing what white conservatives really think. Vote for the candidate who's "not an Indian" and doesn't support them. Vote for white people--Mitt Romney, Scott Brown, Mary Bono Mack--"like us."

For more on Elizabeth Warren, see Brown Is "Bay State Birther" and My Thoughts on Brown vs. Warren. For more on conservative racism, see Majority of Americans Are Racist and Conservative Admits Welfare-Bashing Is Racial.

Brown is "Bay State birther"

Gov. Patrick: Sen. Brown ‘Bay State Birther’ For Warren Native American AdsMassachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick is calling Republican U.S. Sen. Scott Brown “a Bay State birther” for running television campaign ads that focus on Democratic rival Elizabeth Warren’s claims of Native American heritage.

Patrick made the apparent reference to so-called birthers during an interview on WCVB-TV. Birthers maintain President Barack Obama was born in Kenya despite the fact that Hawaii officials have repeatedly verified Obama’s U.S. citizenship.Black clergy in Boston endorse Warren

Brown’s heritage attacks seen as divisive

By Michael LevensonSome of Boston’s most prominent African-American ministers put their support behind Elizabeth Warren Thursday and denounced Senator Scott Brown’s attacks on her purported Native American heritage, saying the issue has become a divisive distraction from more pressing concerns about poverty and violence.

Some of the ministers had strong words for Brown, part of what ­appeared to be a growing backlash among Warren supporters to Brown’s strategy of driving the charged issue in the campaign.

“It’s a dead issue,” said the Rev. Jeffrey Brown, executive director of the Boston TenPoint Coalition, a group of ministers that seeks to ­reduce youth violence. “I know that, as the commercials continue to roll, I cringe. It’s an issue that has no relevance to things that I care about.”

Mayor Thomas M. Menino, who also attended the event at Twelfth Baptist Church in Roxbury, accused Brown of trying to divide the electorate, while Governor Deval ­Patrick, in a television interview, called Brown a “Bay State birther,” an allusion to the conspiracy theory about President Obama’s birthplace.

Menino and Patrick previously endorsed Warren, but their more heated rhetoric seemed to reflect an emotional boiling point in the bitterly fought race.

“Scott Brown, throughout this campaign, has taken on an issue that I think is very derogatory to” Warren and her claims to Native American heritage, said Menino, who stood with Warren and about a half-dozen ministers. “Elected officials take on those issues because they’ve got nothing else to say. It’s about dividing people.”But a columnist suggests why the issue hasn't gone away:

'Minority' claim still dogs Warren thanks to her own mishandling

By Peter LucasThe fact of the matter is that Warren, the Harvard law professor, has contributed greatly to the controversy over her highly dubious Native American ancestry, first by failing to concisely address the issue head-on when it initially was raised by the Boston Herald seven months ago, and then by keeping the matter alive with her frequently run television ad that repeats previous explanations attributing her belief in her Native American background to unsubstantiated family lore.

Granted, Warren had to answer Brown's critical ads, but the big television buy not only has kept the issue in the forefront of the campaign, it has taken time, money and energy away from other, more important issues. Still, the fact that her campaign decided to spend so much money on television advertising to deal with the issues shows how deeply it has cut into her campaign and how much it has hurt.

What has amazed political watchers is how her highly paid team of political consultants has let the issue of her alleged American Indian ancestry get so out of hand. It is the type of issue that should have been addressed and dealt with in a press conference when the Herald first broke the story. Instead, Warren has been all over the place on the issue, and it has been allowed to fester for weeks.

In between, Warren has often made the matter worse by declining to meet with representatives from the Cherokee community, headed by Twila Barnes, a Cherokee genealogist, when they came to Boston to meet with her in June, and also when she also refused to meet with a Native American delegation to the national Democratic Party Convention last month in Charlotte, N.C., where she was a featured speaker.Comment:  For more on Elizabeth Warren, see Is Warren a Racist? and My Thoughts on Brown vs. Warren.

Below:  "Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick speaks during day one of the Democratic National Convention at Time Warner Cable Arena on Sept. 4, 2012 in Charlotte, N.C." (Joe Raedle/Getty Images)

Is Warren a racist?

The Only Racism on Display Has Been From the Elizabeth Warren Camp

By Cole R. DeLauneVarious critics of Brown first enjoyed the opportunity to wax moralistic when the Senator broached the subject of his opponent’s decades-long history of ethnic self-identification during the first debate of the campaign season on September 20. Condensing the extensive and unwieldy topic into time-limited opening remarks, Brown correctly noted that the Cambridge professor had advertised herself as an American Indian in a professional context, “and, as you can see, clearly she’s not.” The Senator since clarified that he was invoking a common idiom to emphasize the substantial evidence that suggests Warren is neither culturally or genealogically Native: as documented realities show, her dishonesty is easily discernible. Of course, sanctimonious fury arose, and the backlash mischaracterized Brown as deploying a myopically superficial definition of race as skin deep. The chorus disseminating this perspective would do well to refer to the comments made by Warren in early May, when she defended the claims to Cherokee and Delaware heritage that remain unsubstantiated to this day by declaring that she has, “high cheekbones…like all the Indians do.” Evidently, policing semantic constructs and political correctness is an inherently selective pastime, since Warren herself has invoked reductive stereotypes and external signifiers of ethnicity when she felt they bolstered her fabricated narrative.DeLaune goes from "substantial evidence that suggests" to "documented realities show," which is a big leap. I'd say we're still at the "suggested" stage, not the "shown" stage. Which mean Warren's "dishonesty" isn't discernible at all, much less "easily." Again, it's not a lie to believe something without proof.

DeLaune seems to think liberals were inconsistent for criticizing Brown's comments about appearance but not Warren's. Wrong. Indians and other liberals widely lampooned Warren's "high cheekbones" remark. If you think she got a free pass on that remark, you weren't reading the news.

No liberal criticism of Warren?Enter the recording of Republican aides mimicking a gesture once popularized for commercial incentive by progressive stalwarts Ted Turner and Jane Fonda. The seconds of inanity captured on the tape in question offend only basic standards of taste: the hyperbole of the scene clearly operates as a satire of the ridiculousness of Warren’s increasingly outlandish improvisations rather than as an expression of anti-Indian animus. But, of course, few authorities wasted any time in taking Brown to task . . . for the conduct of third, fourth, and fifth parties. The rush to ascribe moral responsibility to the Senator for the foolishness of others presents a stark and chilling contrast to the absolution Professor Warren has enjoyed for the appalling prejudice she herself has displayed.To review once more, conservatives haven't proved that Warren has no Native ancestors. More important, they haven't proved that she doesn't sincerely believe what her family told her.

It would've been wise to verify these claims, but she was under no legal obligation to do so. Whenever she claimed to be Native, she apparently thought she was Native enough to do so.

The counterargument, I guess, is that she secretly researched her heritage and found she wasn't Native. Or that she should've sought tribal enrollment if she believed she was Native enough. Or that she should've consistently listed herself as white or Native, even though people with some Indian blood often use both labels.

The so-called satire--war whoops and tomahawk chops--conveys none of these subtle arguments. It doesn't convey anything except a racist notion of what an Indian is. It's no different from what sports fans do when they're encouraging a Native-themed team. Or what little kids do when they ignorantly stereotype Indians as savages.

I've said it before and I'll say it again: When a so-called satire is indistinguishable from a racist attack, there is no satire. We can't mind-read Brown's supporters to learn which ones intend the "satire" and which ones don't. What they're conveying isn't "Warren would be an Indian if she had 1/32 Indian blood and enrolled in a tribe, but she's a phony because she hasn't met these conditions." What they're conveying is "Indians are savage brutes who would rather scalp someone than play by the rules. And so is Warren."

For more on this subject, see:

"Jokes" without punchlines are racist
Landover satirizes "Injun sin"
DJs learn not to satirize Natives
Okay to satirize in "satires"?

Racist to spurn Indians?During an interview in Springfield in early summer, the academic proclaimed that she would be “the first Senator from Massachusetts with a Native background.” However, since Harvard Law’s penchant for highlighting her as a “woman of color” who added a uniquely multicultural perspective first came to light in late April, Warren has refused to speak to Native newspapers and websites, including Indian Country Today, the largest indigenous media outlet in the nation. She rebuffed overtures by Native delegates at the Democratic National Convention in Charlotte to establish lines of communication. And, most memorably, she initially agreed to receive four liberally inclined Cherokee women who traveled across the nation to request an audience, and then, once they arrived, accused them of advancing a right-wing conspiracy. Nothing suggests that she interacted in a meaningful capacity with the indigenous population in Cambridge at any point during her tenure, and she has displayed no understanding of or familiarity with the rituals, customs, traditions, woes, and concerns that texture the contemporary Indian landscape.

When an individual so deliberately and consistently refuses to engage with a specific minority group, such aversions are generally regarded in and of themselves as commensurate with one pillar of personal bigotry. Imagine if any other candidate so repeatedly declined to acknowledge African-Americans, Asian-Americans, Hispanics, LGBT men and women, Catholics, Mormons, Christians, or the members of another cultural community. Such demographics should consider how effectively Professor Warren will champion their interests in the Senate when she projects such transparent antagonism and explicit contempt toward the people with whom she insists she is so “proud” to share a heritage that has “always been a part” of her identity.This is a reasonable summary of what Warren has or hasn't done, but it doesn't tell us her reasons. A few points on that:

1) Do we know that Warren has met with "African-Americans, Asian-Americans, Hispanics, LGBT men and women, Catholics, Mormons, Christians, or the members of another cultural community"? I don't and I doubt DeLaune does either.

2) Indians are only partly a "cultural community." Unlike the groups on DeLaune, they're a political group as well because of their sovereign status. Has Warren met with representatives from China, Iran, or Palestine? Would she if they demanded to see her for the purpose of challenging her position? I doubt it.

3) The reason Warren is avoiding Indians is because she doesn't want to answer their questions. Not because she has some sort of aversion to them. In a tightly controlled political campaign, a Democrat usually doesn't give interviews to Rush Limbaugh, the NRA, or anti-abortion groups. Indians are like that at the moment--a political (not racial) group--that she wants to avoid.

Conclusion

I agree with DeLaune's arguments about what Warren should do: meet with Indians, answer their questions, and so forth. But I don't consider her "racist" because she hasn't done them. Sure, she may be prejudiced against Indians despite choosing to be one occasionally. But refusing to address their politically-based questions isn't evidence of racism.

Meanwhile, DeLaune is giving a free pass to Scott Brown for some unaccountable reason. Brown has stoked a race-based crusade against Warren based on an inconsequential part of her history. He didn't fire any of his staffers for the racist actions he provoked. All he did was claim he doesn't condone those actions.

Well, whoopee. Coming from the guy who's trying to launch a mini-race war, that's nothing. Brown is pandering to his white followers' racial fears, and they've responded the way whites always respond. Namely, with ugly stereotypes to bolster their weak-kneed courage against the scary "other." Brown has encouraged people to attack Warren and he's ultimately responsible for those attacks.

For more on Elizabeth Warren, see My Thoughts on Brown vs. Warren and More Racism from the Brown Campaign.

Origin of the tomahawk chop

‘Tomahawk chop’ pops up in Mass. Senate race after history in arenas, activists’ crosshairsBack in the mid-1980s, the Seminole football boosters asked a student spirit group, then called the Scalphunters, to create a cheer to compete with the University of Florida’s two-armed “Gator chomp,” said Florida State alum Tom Desjardin.

Desjardin, a Scalphunter, said that, for lack of a better idea, they debuted the chop at a 1984 pep rally he was leading. Florida State boosters say the famous chant was added later, on a suggestion from a student from Natick High School in Massachusetts, where the chant was used to support the school’s Redmen, a nickname since changed to the Red Hawks.

The chop really took off in a game at Auburn in 1985, when the Seminole band rolled out an intimidating drum beat and trumpet music to accompany it, said Desjardin, now a historian for the state of Maine.

Desjardin said the chop’s violent imagery wasn’t lost on the Scalphunters, but it wasn’t what drove its creation. A main consideration was the fact it was a shoulder-up motion that could be seen in a crowd, he said.

Desjardin added there’s a deep respect at Florida State for the Seminole tribe, which the school consults closely on all uses of tribal imagery and which in 2005 granted the school permission to use its name.

“If the tribe had ever said, ‘We don’t like that (the chop), you would have never seen it again,’” Desjardin said.Instead, the chop spread to Atlanta. That city’s Seminole Booster Club claims credit for starting it all when some members used it at a Braves game to catch the attention of outfielder Deion Sanders, an FSU alum who began playing for Atlanta in 1991.

When the Braves made the World Series that year against Minnesota, American Indian groups protested in Minneapolis and Atlanta, saying the cheer perpetuated racist stereotypes of Native Americans as war-obsessed savages. Some called out Braves owner Ted Turner and his wife at the time, Jane Fonda, for doing the chop.

But former President Jimmy Carter defended it, saying it was a way to note that the team was emulating the courage of American Indians.Comment:  Turner, Fonda, and Carter are as wrong as everyone else about the "honoring" argument.

If the Seminole Tribe protested the tomahawk chop, it probably would face the usual firestorm of protest. The school would try to negotiate a compromise rather than simply ban the practice. See the whole "Fighting Sioux" conflict for a good example of how it would play out.

For more on the subject, see More Racism from the Brown Campaign and Brown Staffers Whoop and Chop.

Below:  The Seminoles' spearchucking mascot Chief Osceola.

My thoughts on Brown vs. Warren

A Native colleague said he was going on the radio to discuss Elizabeth Warren and asked what I thought. My response:

I'm sure you've been following the story. I don't have any special insights, but here's how I'd approach it.

I'd say they both deserve criticism. Brown is obviously playing racial politics. He hasn't proved Warren lied or did anything wrong. (Believing a family legend without proof isn't a lie.) All he's done is insinuate that she's hiding something.

This issue has little or nothing to do with her qualifications to be senator. It's all about stoking the racial fears and prejudices of his followers. I bet they'd react the same way if she were an enrolled citizen, but the cheating angle is irresistible. We can see how they've responded: the stereotypical headlines, the war whoops and tomahawk chops, and the "Princess Little Big Liar" billboard.

Warren is obviously playing Indian. Like every other wannabe in existence, she has a rumor of a Cherokee (princess) in her background. Acknowledging that tiny alleged part of her heritage is one thing, but she listed herself as Native, period, in a cookbook, a directory, and a job application or diversity report.

She hasn't answered any of the key questions about her claims. Why did she switch from white to Native to white again? If she wanted to "network," why didn't she join a Native group or get involved in Native issues? She admits she told at least one school she was Native. How is that assumed identity not a crass career move to jump ahead of the line?

In short, I'd criticize both sides equally. They're both guilty of playing politics and obfuscating the real issues of tribal citizenship and identity. America needs a serious dialogue about these issues and they're blowing a golden opportunity.

P.S. The evenhanded approach also has the advantage of making you look better than any partisan on one side or the other. <g>

Aftermath

Someone on the radio show made a good point. People have learned to associate Indians with headdresses, war whoops, and tomahawk chops from a myriad of old movies, bad TV shows, and sports mascots. Once learned, they don't limit this behavior to "harmless" activities like rooting at a sports game. They're using it to ridicule someone who could be part Indian.

Note that the insulting behavior began before people investigated Warren's background. So they're not doing it because they proved Warren was lying. It's more basic than that. Whenever a controversy about Indians arises, you can expect ignoramuses to trot out the usual stereotypes: chiefs, headdresses, tomahawks, savages, drunks, etc.

For more on Elizabeth Warren, see More Racism from the Brown Campaign and Why Brown and Warren Are Wrong.

More racism from the Brown campaign

War Whoops Heard In 2nd Video Of Brown CampaigningA second video has surfaced showing Republican U.S. Sen. Scott Brown speaking to supporters while war whoops can be heard in the background.

The whoops, apparently from a lone supporter, escalate as Brown criticizes Democrat Elizabeth Warren’s claims of Native American heritage.

Brown doesn’t react in the brief clip. It’s not clear that Brown even heard the person.

The video, recorded at a Republican fundraiser in Chatham over the summer, was posted by the Democrat-leaning Blue Mass Group Wednesday.
Local Anti-Elizabeth Warren Sign Ridicules Her as ‘Princess Little Big Liar’Robert Sullivan, 64, owner of Sullivans Inc., a motorcycle accessories distributor in Hanson, Massachusetts, has posted two signs outside his store featuring Elizabeth Warren in American Indian headdress with war paint on her face, reported WickedLocal.com.

The signs state: “Elizabeth Warren is a joke. Princess Little Big Liar. Vote Scott Brown United States Senate,” criticizing the U.S. Senate candidate for her claimed Cherokee and Dakota heritage. Indian Country Today Media Network’s Rob Capriccioso has written extensively about Warren’s claim, including a story about the Senate debate.

“We’re $16 trillion dollars in debt and these politicians don’t seem to care and somebody’s got to pay the tab, right?” Sullivan told the local newspaper.

Sullivan is also the man behind controversial anti-Obama ads. On one placard, a young girl gives the middle finger to the President. The other displays President Obama’s photo beside the remarks: “Somewhere in Kenya a village is missing its idiot. Obama One Big Ass Mistake America, Vote Mitt Romney for 2012!”

Response from Indians

NCAI Characterizes Massachusetts Senate Campaign as “Extremely Disturbing”

National tribal organization calls for civil discourse and immediate stop to politicization of Native identityNCAI Executive Director Jacqueline Pata released the following statement:In the last week, the Massachusetts Senate race reached an extremely disturbing place. The National Congress of American Indians is calling for the candidates to return civility to the public discourse and to immediately stop the politicization of Native identity. On Tuesday, video footage was released showing Senator Brown’s staff leading crowds in ‘war whooping’ and ‘tomahawk chopping’ during a clash with Warren supporters. Additionally, last Thursday Senator Brown made inflammatory remarks about Warren’s skin color as an indicator that she is not of Native descent.

The video footage of Senator Brown’s staff engaged in ‘war whooping’ and ‘tomahawk chopping’ is not only offensive and demeaning to Native Americans it is also demoralizing to citizens across the country. It’s concerning that experienced staff members of a United States Senator would act this way; Senator Brown should take corrective action immediately. These actions belittle the democratic process and are emblematic of an irresponsible public discourse on race and Native identity by misinformed individuals and the media.

Elizabeth Warren also bears responsibility for allowing the public discourse about Native identity to become misrepresented. She has every right to be proud of her family, however her campaign failed to educate a non-Native media and the public unfamiliar with federal tribal enrollment rules or about historic federal policies that make proving Native ancestry very difficult for some people. Finally, Warren’s campaign did not respond to requests for interviews from Native media organizations. All of these actions could have gone a long way to reducing tension and increasing awareness.

The video released of Brown’s staffers comes just days after Senator Brown responded to a question during the opening of a September 20, 2012 televised debate between the two candidates in which he referred to Warren’s white skin color as proof that she is not of Native American descent in response to an opening question about character, “I think character is important…what you are referring to is the fact that Professor Warren claimed she is a Native American, a person of color, and as you can see, she is not.”

Skin color or physical appearance has no bearing on one’s Native American heritage or status as an enrolled member of a federally recognized tribe. As a result, numerous national television programs and websites have irresponsibly echoed Senator Brown’s statements by referring to someone’s skin color as an indicator for Native American identity. These claims are false and Senator Brown should correct the record and retract his statement immediately.

NCAI is concerned by the negative and racially charged statements and actions that are the result of the politicization of the issue of Native ancestry. This issue has no bearing on the qualifications to be the Senator of Massachusetts.

Native American peoples have long endured discrimination and we will not tolerate, nor should the American people tolerate, a return to hostile environments or ignorant discourse about America’s first peoples. Nor should we tolerate a hostile environment about a common characteristic many people share, a connection to Native American ancestry.

Today, Native people are proud of our ancestors, our place in the American family of governments, and we will not stand for irresponsible behavior or public discourse.Comment:  I'd say the NCAI's statement accurately reflects the Native sentiment I've seen. Many Indians are Democrats who support Warren, but some have questions about her heritage claims. Nobody finds Brown's comments or the actions of his supporters acceptable.

Let's add that it's not clear Warren has lied about anything. By all accounts, she sincerely believes her family legends whether they're true or not.

It's not a lie to stick with a belief even if you have no evidence for it. If that weren't the case, a few billion people would be "liars" for believing in their religion.

For more on Elizabeth Warren, see Why Brown and Warren Are Wrong and Cherokee Chief Denounces Brown Staffers.

Why Brown and Warren are wrong

Senator Scott Brown’s Racist and Anti-Indian Campaign Rallies: Why Progressive People Should Give Money to Elizabeth Warren’s Campaign in Order to Get this Bigot Out of Office

By Gyasi Ross[T]he Scott Brown campaign decided to go a bit further than simply “questioning” her authenticity as a Native American. No, that wasn’t enough; instead, at a recent campaign rally, the campaign worked the crowd into a frenzy to the point where they were mocking and ridiculing the stereotypical Native “war cries” and “tomahawk chops.” Now, Brown said that he doesn’t “condone” the behavior, but in the same breath said that ”The real offense is that [Warren] said she was white and then checked the box saying she is Native American…”

No, the real offense is Brown excusing racism and attempting to deflect from the hate speech being conducted at his rally. The behavior there was bigoted, and his attempts to excuse it are likewise bigoted.

Disgusting. Don’t believe me?

Now obviously, this isn’t real Native American behavior—it’s the evil fantasy of what a bunch of racist white men think Native American behavior looks like. That doesn’t make it any better—imagine if they were slanting their eyes and acting like they were doing karate in mocking gestures of stereotypical Asian gestures. What would the reaction be then? Or alternatively, if they were in blackface and shuffling their feet in mocking gestures of unpleasant and racist African-American imagery?

There would be hell to pay. There should be hell to pay now. Objectively.

We need to hold Warren’s feet to the fire and figure out relationship with Indian country; I am hopeful that she will be an ally. It’s safe to say that she owes us some answers. Still, I would much rather roll the dice with Ms. Warren than with a man who excuses racist behavior within his campaign—he’s obviously not a friend to Native people, and you can probably safely assume that is not much of a friend to any vulnerable people. Remember: if it were you or your group, you would take action. Take action now—please give to Elizabeth Warren’s Campaign and let’s get this bigot out of office.Massachusetts Senatorial Race: Identity Standards, Not Identity Politics

By Suzan Shown HarjoBrown and Warren are lawyers—he’s been making law and she’s been teaching law. They know the meaning of evidence and standing. They should know that federal and tribal Native American identity centers on nationhood and citizenship, under criteria set by each Native nation. The standard is political relationship, not racial composition.

“I never asked for documentation,” said Warren, “What kid would?” Kids of the 39 Native nations in and pre-dating Oklahoma (Warren’s home state) have all sorts of documentation, from treaties and governance documents to tribal IDs to verify eligibility for health care.

Even if Warren never sought or noticed proof about her family or ties to Native peoples past and present, is she curious about or interested in others, such as the many Native students at her Northwest Classen High School in Oklahoma City? Did she make friends with any? Did she ever go to a pow-wow or to a Cherokee or Delaware event? Oklahoma has the second largest Native population of any state today and Oklahoma City has the fourth largest Native population of any U.S. city. It’s hard to miss Native peoples or history in Oklahoma. Did she notice the awful “No Indians or Dogs Allowed” signs in Oklahoma when she was growing up?

As an adult, did she contact the Cherokee Nation or Delaware Tribe? As a lawyer or law professor, did she contact any tribal courts to find out how they are structured or how they handle cases in her areas of legal interest? Did she seek Native lawyers, teachers, students or policymakers in D.C. or Michigan (she was there at the height of the treaty fishing and hunting courtroom wars) or Harvard? Why didn’t she meet with Native American Delegates at the Democratic National Convention in August? They were trying to help her.

If she were so proud and certain of her family history and she did check the Native American box, why not admit it? If she did not, why not? And why the box-hopping from white to minority to Native and back to white?Comment:  Pundits have made similar points in both Brown's and Warren's case before. Brown's campaign is a thinly veiled attempt to stoke racial prejudice: Racial Politics of Warren Case. Warren hasn't been begun to answer the questions put to her: Warren Benefited from White Privilege.

For more on Elizabeth Warren, see Brown:  Warren Doesn't Look Native and Brown Staffers Whoop and Chop.

Cherokee chief denounces Brown staffers

Cherokee Nation calls actions of Sen. Scott Brown staff 'offensive' and 'racist'

Rally video surfaces after campaigns release ads about Warren's heritageThe Principal Chief of the Cherokee Nation issued a strongly worded statement Wednesday, denouncing the actions of staffers and supporters of the Sen. Scott Brown campaign, who were shown in a YouTube video chanting Indian "war whoops" and making "tomahawk chops" during a rally for the Republican senator earlier in the week in Boston.

Staff members on Massachusetts Sen. Scott Brown's campaign have been caught on camera directing tomahawk chops toward supporters of opponent Elizabeth Warren, who has claimed her family has Native American heritage. Take a look at other notable missteps candidates and their campaigns have taken during the 2012 election season.

"The conduct of these individuals goes far beyond what is appropriate and proper in political discourse. The use of stereotypical “war whoop chants” and “tomahawk chops” are offensive and downright racist. It is those types of actions that perpetuate negative stereotypes and continue to minimize and degrade all native peoples," Bill John Baker, Principal Chief of the Cherokee Nation said in a statement.Comment:  For more on Elizabeth Warren, see Brown:  Warren Doesn't Look Native and Brown Staffers Whoop and Chop.

Brown: Warren doesn't look Native

Scott Brown channels Jesse Helms

Scott Brown channels his inner Jesse Helms and attacks Elizabeth Warren for "using" her Native American heritage

By Joan WalshIn last week’s debate, Brown channeled Helms when he attacked Warren. “Professor Warren claimed that she was a Native American, a person of color, and as you can see, she’s not,” he said. “When she applied to Penn and Harvard, she checked the box claiming she was a Native American. Clearly she’s not. That being said, I don’t know, and neither do the viewers know whether she got ahead as a result of checking that box.”

There are so many things wrong with Brown’s take on Warren’s heritage it’s hard to know where to start. For one thing, “as you can see” isn’t the way we classify people racially. Given our nation’s history of racial mixing, it’s a dangerous and insensitive place to go. It showed Brown up as cosseted in his own white world, unaware of the complexities of diversity—that people can wind up looking like one ethnicity when they are actually from another.

Most important, it showed Brown is willing to play on the anxieties of white men that women and minorities are using affirmative action to take jobs they should have. He came right out and said we don’t know “whether she got ahead as a result of checking that box.” It was astonishing. Watching the debate at the time, I tweeted, “I cannot believe Scott Brown talked about Warren’s racial background so stridently. It’s like the old ‘white hands’ ad.”

I’m not denying there are reasonable questions about Warren’s racial heritage and how she has identified herself over the years. Earlier in the campaign, she took too long to answer some of those questions. But her story that she was told she had Native American heritage by her family—in fact, that her parents had to elope because her father’s family disdained her mother’s family’s Cherokee and Delaware background—and that she never questioned it, has the ring of truth to those of us who’ve grown up on complicated family stories about ethnicity and secrets. In a Boston Globe story this weekend, some of Warren’s cousins corroborated her story, saying they too were told of ancestors who hid their Native American ancestry, while others said they’d never heard that (Warren’s siblings backed her up right away).

For Scott Brown to decide he’s going to be the arbiter of Warren’s complicated racial heritage is the height of white male privilege and arrogance.Really, Scott Brown?

By Josh MarshallNow, there’s a whole complicated debate about what it means to “look white” and obviously there are different hues of Cherokee in the US today. But I think the examples above speak for themselves. Brown apparently thinks that if Warren were a real Cherokee she’d be over there at the podium with dark-hued skin, war paint and a feather headdress.

Whether Warren was right to claim some level of Indian ancestry or whether she’s credentialed with this or that tribe I don’t really know or care about. But this “she don’t look Indian” line Brown is now basing his campaign on is ignorant to the point of offensive.Comment:  Newspaper Rock readers would never make this mistake, I'm sure.

For more on Elizabeth Warren, see Dueling Ads on Warren's Heritage and Brown Confronts Warren About Heritage.

Below:  Principal Chief Bill John Baker of the Cherokee Nation.

Brown staffers whoop and chop

Brown Staffers Make ‘Tomahawk Chop’ Motions At Warren Supporters

By Eric KleefeldStaffers for Sen. Scott Brown (R-MA) reportedly participated in war-whoop sounds and “tomahawk chop” gestures at supporters of Democratic challenger Elizabeth Warren, mocking Warren’s claimed Native American ancestry.

The incident occurred this past Saturday in Boston, at a rally for Brown featuring former Boston Mayor Ray Flynn, and at which a group of Warren supporters also showed up with signs. The video was posted Tuesday by the state liberal blog Blue Mass Group.

According to the local ABC affiliate in Boston, it has been confirmed that among the participants were Brown’s deputy Chief of Staff Greg Casey, Constituent Service Counsel Jack Richard, plus state GOP operative Brad Garrett.

“It is certainly something that I don’t condone,” Brown himself told the station. “The real offense is that (Warren) said she was white and then checked the box saying she is Native American, and then she changed her profile in the law directory once she made her tenure.”
Comment:  For more on Elizabeth Warren, see Dueling Ads on Warren's Heritage and Brown Confronts Warren About Heritage.

Dueling ads on Warren's heritage

New Elizabeth Warren ad responds to Scott Brown's attacks on Native American issue

By Shira SchoenbergDemocratic Senate candidate Elizabeth Warren responded to a TV ad attacking her use of her Native American ancestry with her own ad that directly addresses the controversy.

Monday morning, the campaign of Republican U.S. Sen. Scott Brown released a TV ad attacking Warren on the question of whether she used of her Native American heritage to benefit her career.

Asked about the ad at an event Monday morning, Warren declined to address it directly. But by the evening, the Warren campaign had shot back a response. In an ad featuring Warren talking directly to the camera, Warren offers a similar explanation to one she gave in Thursday’s night’s debate.

Warren says in the ad that as a kid, she never asked her parents for documentation of her heritage. “What kid would?” she asks. She says her parents eloped because father’s family didn’t like that her mother was part Cherokee and part Delaware. “Let me be clear,” Warren says. “I never asked for and never got any benefit because of my heritage. The people who hired me have all said they didn’t even know about it.” The ad concludes with Warren saying, “Scott Brown can continue attacking my family, but I’m going to continue fighting for yours.”Scott Brown attacks Elizabeth Warren for use of Native American heritage with new TV ad

By Shira SchoenbergThere’s no more Mr. and Mrs. Nice Guy in the Massachusetts U.S. Senate race.

After Democratic Harvard Law Professor Elizabeth Warren released a TV ad attacking Republican U.S. Sen. Scott Brown, Brown is fighting back with a negative ad of his own – focusing on Warren’s use of her Native American heritage.

The ad features a series of news clips from this summer when Warren was confronted with questions about whether she used her Native American heritage to advance her career. The ad concludes with a clip of Warren being asked whether anything else will come out about her. Her joking response, “I don’t think so, but who knows?”

Warren listed her herself as a minority in law directories, and Harvard University and the University of Pennsylvania both listed her as Native American in diversity statistics. Warren has not provided documentation of her heritage, but has said it is part of her family lore.Comment:  To refresh your memory, the issue isn't what Warren's parents told her. No one is seriously questioning that, although Warren is wrong that no one questions their parents. My impression is that everyone does it. You ask them about family secrets and try to clear up vague claims. It's most common when you're adopted or a parent is missing, but it's common whenever there's a mystery.

One real issue is how the schools knew about her heritage if she didn't tell them. And in fact she's admitted telling them about it, so she's lying about not doing so. This knowledge may not have affected their decision to hire her, although that strains credulity. But it certainly raises more questions.

Another issue is why she claimed Native heritage for a while and then stopped. Claiming it in a cookbook is one thing, but in a professional capacity? Are we seriously supposed to believe she was just trying to meet other Natives? When she made no effort whatsoever to join Native groups or learn Native issues? Again, her explanation strains credulity.

For more on Elizabeth Warren, see Brown Confronts Warren About Heritage and Elizabeth Warren Ducks Native Delegates.

Brown confronts Warren about heritage

US Sen. Scott Brown Confronts Elizabeth Warren on Her American Indian Claims

By Rob CapricciosoIn his most direct shots against U.S. Senate candidate Elizabeth Warren, U.S. Sen. Scott Brown, R-Massachusetts, challenged her claims of Native American heritage in their first debate on the evening of September 20—and the shots kept coming from his campaign after the debate ended.

Kicking off a lively one-on-one in Boston, Brown looked at Warren squarely, and said she had presented no evidence to show she has Cherokee and Delaware ancestry, which she has claimed for years sans any tribal enrollment or genealogical evidence. She has relied on family folklore to back up her claim, but genealogists, including Indian ones, who have researched the lore have found no blood ties that would indicate she is any part Native.

“She checked the box claiming she is Native American, and clearly she is not…. I think character is important,” Brown said. “You refuse to release your records, and I think that speaks volumes.”

Warren responded that she has answered all questions about her claimed heritage, and she believes the election should be focused on jobs and taxes.

“I never used it, never used it for getting into college, never used it for getting into law school,” Warren said. “There’s nothing else there, the question has been asked and answered. I think the senator just doesn’t like the answer.”And:While Warren and her campaign have downplayed the importance of this Native identity issue, Brown says it speaks directly to her character, and polls have indicated that it matters to independent voters. With the race currently very close between the candidates, with polls alternating who is in the lead by the day, every vote here will matter, experts say.

Warren has done little to help calm the controversy, instead always sticking to her story on family lore. She has chosen not to do interviews with the Native press, has ignored visits and inquiries from Cherokees, and she refused to meet with Native American delegates at the Democratic National Convention earlier this month. Her campaign did not respond to questions from Indian Country Today Media Network after the debate.

In recent days, some relatives of Elizabeth Warren have told The Boston Globe that they share none of her remembrance of Indian ancestry, while others cited the same lore she has relied on. Sen. John McCain, R-Arizona, and former chair of the U.S. Senate Committee on Indian Affairs, also recently called her claim “bizarre. … I know lots and lots of Native Americans, they have a very huge presence in my state and I’ve yet to meet one of them who claims to be related to Elizabeth Warren,” McCain told The Boston Herald earlier this week.For more of their exchange over Warren's heritage, see:

Warren And Brown Hammer Each Other Non-Stop In First Debate

Comment:  Warren still hasn't answered most of the questions asked of her. Her claim that she has is disingenuous, if not a lie.

For more on Elizabeth Warren, see Angry Patriots and Pinheads and Elizabeth Warren Ducks Native Delegates.

Angry Patriots and Pinheads

Elections 2012: The Election Played as a Video Game

By Mark TrahantThe birther movement–the far-fetched idea that President Barack Obama is not a natural born American–has moved to a new platform, the video game, Angry Patriots and Pinheads. According to the company’s website, the game uses “a Revolutionary War cannon to launch patriotic characters or the “Angry Patriots” at socialist politicians, actors, musicians, other mainstream pinheads as well as a variety of ‘jack asses’ stationed throughout the board.”

One such character is Elizabeth Warren. The promotional video shows Warren wearing feathers. She is asked by a Kenyan-flag-waving Obama, “Liz, So are you Cherokee?” The tag line says she proclaimed her 1/32 Cherokee Heritage (a story debunked here by Indian Country Today Media Network).Comment:  Just be clear, the "angry patriots" aren't the same people as the "pinheads," as you'd expect. These angry patriots are fighting the people they consider pinheads.

Apparently the game uses stereotypes to make its racist points. Warren is a pretend Indian and Obama is a Kenyan. No doubt women are shrill, gays are effeminate, and Muslims are terrorists.

If the game-makers think they're being clever or funny, they're mistaken. Dressing up as Indians started before the Boston Tea Party 239 years ago. I believe cartoonists have been sticking white men in leathers and feathers ever since. To reiterate a centuries-old "joke" is pathetic, not original or insightful.

For more on Elizabeth Warren, see Elizabeth Warren Ducks Native Delegates and Warren:  Conservatives Back Cherokee Protesters.

Elizabeth Warren ducks Native delegates

Indian delegates seek sit-down with Elizabeth Warren

Tribal activist: ‘Shame on her’

By Hillary Chabot and Joe BattenfeldElizabeth Warren can’t escape her Cherokee heritage controversy even at this gathering of loyal Democrats, as a contingent of skeptical American Indian delegates—including the great-grandson of Geronimo—are inviting Warren to a meeting tomorrow to explain her ancestry claims.

“I think she owes us that, she owes the Native American community here at least that,” said Stephen Lewis, a member of the Gila River Indian community. “That would go a long way in dispelling that question.”

The Truth Squad paid a visit to a gathering of American Indian delegates to ask their feelings about the Massachusetts Democratic U.S. Senate challenger, and many of them expressed anger that Warren listed herself as an American Indian minority in law school directories without any proof.

“If you are native, there is no doubt, and if one has to research to try and ascertain if they are Native American, I would have great concerns with that and I think naturally I would just wonder if that was a vehicle she would want to use to her benefit,” said Frank LeMere, an American Indian activist of the Nebraska Winnebago Tribe. “If that is the case, shame on her.”

The delegates extended an invitation to Warren to appear at their caucus meeting tomorrow, just before she is slated to give a prime-time address on the convention stage.

“If you’re going to claim that you are American Indian and a descendant of some Native nation then you have to represent,” said Sharon Stewart-Peregoy, a Montana state senator and member of the Crow Nation. “You have to step up and bring those (American Indian) issues forward. That’s what it’s all about.”

Harlyn Geronimo, the great-grandson of the legendary Apache warrior, said he didn’t know the details of Warren’s claims but wanted to make sure she didn’t try to “take advantage” of her Cherokee claims. Warren has offered no proof of her ancestry but says she is relying on “stories” relayed to her by her family.

“I wouldn’t vote for anybody that is being dishonest, and it’s unfair to our people,” he said.Warren at DNC, ignores Native American questions

By Hillary ChabotElizabeth Warren, scrambling to shift focus from her ongoing Cherokee scandal, dismissed demands from Native Americans who want her to explain her heritage claims in her first appearance at the Democratic National Convention this morning.

“I’ve answered those questions, what I’m here to talk about (is) what’s happening to America’s working class families,” said Warren, who had just completed brief appearances on the “Today Show” before the prime-time speech tomorrow.Cherokees use GOP video to target Elizabeth Warren claims

By Hillary ChabotMassachusetts Republicans looking to overshadow Elizabeth Warren’s turn in the national spotlight are releasing a video with Cherokees at a nearby reservation saying her heritage claims are “slapping Native Americans in the face.”

“That’s not right at all. She is lying to the American public by running for public office and claiming to be of a race that she is not. If she is claiming that she is Native American, prove it,” says John Grant, a resident of Cherokee, N.C., in a GOP video.

The nearly two-minute Web video was filmed in Cherokee long before the Herald interviewed American Indian delegates Monday who also expressed outrage about Warren’s claims to Indian heritage. The Harvard Law School professor dismissed the delegates’ request that she meet with them and discuss her background.Elizabeth Warren campaign says Native American Council has not sought meeting to discuss heritage claim

By Callum Borchers and Noah BiermanSenate candidate Elizabeth Warren’s campaign said Tuesday that the Democratic National Convention’s Native American Council has not asked her to appear at a meeting to answer questions about her claim to Cherokee heritage.

The Boston Herald reported earlier Tuesday that Native American convention delegates invited Warren to Wednesday’s council meeting, after the paper asked them about Warren’s unsubstantiated assertion that she has Cherokee ancestry.Comment:  I gather the Native American Council is a step below a caucus. Kind of an informal caucus, because Indians haven't had enough delegates to form an official caucus...so far.

Anyway, it sounds as though Warren is parsing the "invitation" like a typical lawyer/politician. Did the individual delegates invite her but not the Council as a whole? Is she waiting until it's an official caucus, which may not happen until 2016? Is she insisting on an engraved invitation?

Whatever the nature of the invitation, she should meet with the Indians. You claimed you were Native, Liz--now explain yourself.

Warren's mantra that she's "answered those questions" is rubbish, of course. Indians have asked a lot of questions she hasn't answered. Starting with what gives her the right to call herself Native.

Warren is sinking her chances of holding higher office. Her brand is plain-speaking, but she's acting like Mitt Romney hiding his tax returns.
Few people trust a politician who won't answer questions openly and honestly.

For more on Elizabeth Warren, see Warren:  Conservatives Back Cherokee Protesters and Warren Benefited from White Privilege.

Below:  Harlyn Geronimo in a stereotypical Plains headdress. (Christopher Evans)

Warren and Depp, wannabes

Indian Comics Irregular #210:  Warren and Depp, Wannabes