Trump mocks Elizabeth Warren’s heritage AND #metoo

[Dill]

(02-08-2019, 09:59 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I didn't state a rational person must decide if EW was NA; nor to provide and standard of proof.

I simply stated a rational person must decide why she did it.

I'll place you in the population that she really thought NA was the most accurate way to identify herself and in no way did so to gain an advantage (as you refuse to provide an actual answer). I'll wait for some to give you a class on "white privilege" and how EW bastardized it. They'll be along any second I'm sure.

 Again, you just don't seem to be reading my posts. Or why would you claim to see "nothing original" in them, then post a link whose points are already refuted, and perceive bolding of main ideas as "random"?

Explain why what I have already written about "why she did it" doesn't count as an answer.  Here is what I wrote in Post #177. 

Lots of people with hybrid or partial identities who can change their identification often do so at different points in their life, or in different legal/social contexts. In the U.S. this may be more true of people with NA ancestry than any other demographic, and especially since many NA people reject DNA quantum as a criterion of "Indianess." If she has primarily identified as Caucasian throughout her life, has no tribal affiliation, and no desire to squeeze out a possible diversity hire, then it makes sense to go with "C" when seeking jobs. But still keep telling people the story about her ancestry that her parents told her. Contribute to a cookbook.  Register as NA for the Texas bar. Not for Massachusetts.  The evidence we have is consistent with this; career advancement would show a different pattern--NA when applying for jobs.

We cannot get inside her head. We can only follow her behavior.  If you are trying to claim NA to "gain an advantage," that's not how you do it.

So I can look in the mirror just fine after that explanation. I could not if I steadily ignored contrary evidence while positioning myself as a straight shooter whose questions no one will answer.  Deja vu.