[CTRL] Pedigree of King George [Bush]

1999-12-12 Thread Das GOAT

 -Caveat Lector-

 "George Bush has 7 known descents from King Edward I of England."


 from soc.genealogy.medieval newsgroup:

Subject: Re: Governor George Walker Bush - Next President?
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Stewart Baldwin)
Date: Sat, 11 December 1999 12:33 AM EST
Message-id: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

On 10 Dec 1999 18:51:52 -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (John Ravilious)
wrote:

Friday, Dec. 10, 1999


A Year 2000 Question for The Group:

  I recall an article (not well written) from ca. 1993 concerning
U.S. presidential elections and royal descent.  The writer, citing an
interview from a representative (?) of Burke's, or another royal descent
purveyor, stated that (1) all U. S. Presidents have had at least one
royal ancestor, (2) their opponents in the general election have had
also, and (3) that whichever candidate had _the most royal descent_ was
the eventual winner of the election.

  Now, I have seen pedigrees posted hither and yon showing royal
descents for several (but not all) U.S. Presidents.  With regard to the
upcoming election, assuming the Burke's Corollary to Murphy's Law has
and will continue to hold, it might be worthwhile if we could determine
who of the current field has _the most royal descent_ [a definition of
this term would be helpful, I suppose, but for a dyed-in-the-purple-wool
Burkist this might take all the fun out of it].  We could then arrange
for a rapid coronation, and the other candidates could then go back to
their other endeavours [or possibly seek to arrange more productive
pedigrees].

  By way of starting the process, I recall that George H. W. Bush
has 7 known descents from Edward I of England [if Barbara B. adds to the
total, this will up the ante somewhat].  Does any one have information
as to any of the other candidates?

  The eyes of Texas are upon you.


   John


That story has been discussed before on this group, and there is not
the slightest bit of truth to it.  To give one example, Bill Clinton
has no known royal descents, yet he beat George Bush, who has several.
Also, there have been a few occasions where the same two men ran
against each other in more than one election, with different winners
(most notably Grover Cleveland and Benjamin Harrison).

Stewart Baldwin

DECLARATION  DISCLAIMER
==
CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic
screeds are not allowed. Substance—not soapboxing!  These are sordid matters
and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright
frauds is used politically  by different groups with major and minor effects
spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL
gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers;
be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and
nazi's need not apply.

Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.

Archives Available at:
http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html

http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/

To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Om



Re: [CTRL] Pedigree of King George [Bush]

1999-12-12 Thread earthman

 -Caveat Lector-

Isn't Cinton supposed to be the grandson of a Rockafella??

Peter

We are about to go on a Journey. All Aboard
http://sites.netscape.net/gsussnzl/poleshift




- Original Message -
From: Das GOAT [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, December 12, 1999 11:25 PM
Subject: [CTRL] Pedigree of King George [Bush]


 -Caveat Lector-

  "George Bush has 7 known descents from King Edward I of England."


  from soc.genealogy.medieval newsgroup:

 Subject: Re: Governor George Walker Bush - Next President?
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Stewart Baldwin)
 Date: Sat, 11 December 1999 12:33 AM EST
 Message-id: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

 On 10 Dec 1999 18:51:52 -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (John Ravilious)
 wrote:

 Friday, Dec. 10, 1999
 
 
 A Year 2000 Question for The Group:
 
   I recall an article (not well written) from ca. 1993 concerning
 U.S. presidential elections and royal descent.  The writer, citing an
 interview from a representative (?) of Burke's, or another royal descent
 purveyor, stated that (1) all U. S. Presidents have had at least one
 royal ancestor, (2) their opponents in the general election have had
 also, and (3) that whichever candidate had _the most royal descent_ was
 the eventual winner of the election.
 
   Now, I have seen pedigrees posted hither and yon showing royal
 descents for several (but not all) U.S. Presidents.  With regard to the
 upcoming election, assuming the Burke's Corollary to Murphy's Law has
 and will continue to hold, it might be worthwhile if we could determine
 who of the current field has _the most royal descent_ [a definition of
 this term would be helpful, I suppose, but for a dyed-in-the-purple-wool
 Burkist this might take all the fun out of it].  We could then arrange
 for a rapid coronation, and the other candidates could then go back to
 their other endeavours [or possibly seek to arrange more productive
 pedigrees].
 
   By way of starting the process, I recall that George H. W. Bush
 has 7 known descents from Edward I of England [if Barbara B. adds to the
 total, this will up the ante somewhat].  Does any one have information
 as to any of the other candidates?
 
   The eyes of Texas are upon you.
 
 
John
 

 That story has been discussed before on this group, and there is not
 the slightest bit of truth to it.  To give one example, Bill Clinton
 has no known royal descents, yet he beat George Bush, who has several.
 Also, there have been a few occasions where the same two men ran
 against each other in more than one election, with different winners
 (most notably Grover Cleveland and Benjamin Harrison).

 Stewart Baldwin

 DECLARATION  DISCLAIMER
 ==
 CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting
propagandic
 screeds are not allowed. Substance-not soapboxing!  These are sordid
matters
 and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and
outright
 frauds is used politically  by different groups with major and minor
effects
 spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL
 gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to
readers;
 be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and
 nazi's need not apply.

 Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
 
 Archives Available at:
 http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html

 http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
 
 To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
 SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

 To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
 SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

 Om


DECLARATION  DISCLAIMER
==
CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic
screeds are not allowed. Substance—not soapboxing!  These are sordid matters
and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright
frauds is used politically  by different groups with major and minor effects
spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL
gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers;
be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and
nazi's need not apply.

Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.

Archives Available at:
http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html

http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/

To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Om