Just for grins I decided to look up Clinton's cabinet members, here are the
results... please correct me if I get some of these wrong-
White Males: 14
White Females: 4
African American Males: 4
Afican American Females: 1
Hispanic Males: 3 (1 served in 2 positions)
Japaneese Males: 1
On another note, you'd be suprised at a definition of "rich".
Hatton
Oh, and in case you're wondering, here's where I got the numbers above from:
Secretary of State
Warren M. Christopher (1993-97) (W/M)
Madeleine Albright (1997-2001) (W/F)
Secretary of the Treasury
Lloyd M. Bentsen (1993-94) (W/M)
Robert E. Rubin (1995-99) (W/M)
Lawrence H. Summers (1999-2001) (W/M)
Secretary of Defense
Les Aspin, Jr. (1993-94) (W/M)
William J. Perry (1994-97) (W/M)
William Cohen (1997-2001) (W/M)
Attorney General
Janet Reno (1993-2001) (W/F)
Secretary of the Interior
Bruce Babbitt (1993-2001) (W/M)
Secretary of Agriculture
Mike Espy (1993-94) (AA/M)
(Indicted)
Dan Glickman (1994-2001) (W/M)
Secretary of Commerce
Ronald H. Brown (1993-96) (AA/M)
Mickey Kantor (1996-97) (W/M)
William Daley (1997-2000) (W/M)
Norman Y. Mineta (2000-01) (J/M)
Secretary of Labor
Robert B. Reich (1993-97) (W/M)
Alexis M. Herman (1997-2001) (AA/F)
Secretary of Health and Human Services
Donna E. Shalala (1993-2001) (W/F)
Secretary of Housing and Urban Development
Henry G. Cisneros (1993-97) (H/M)
Andrew M. Cuomo (1997-2001) (W/M)
Secretary of Transportation
Federico F. Pe�a (1993-97) (H/M)
Rodney Slater (1997-2001) (AA/M)
Secretary of Energy
Hazel R. O'Leary (1993-97) (W/F)
Federico F. Pe�a (1997-98) (H/M)*
Bill Richardson (1998-2001) (W/M)
Secretary of Education
Richard W. Riley (1993-2001) (W/M)
Secretary of Veterans Affairs
Jesse Brown (1993-97) (AA/M)
Togo D. West, Jr. (1998-2000) (H?/M)
Hershel W. Gober (2000-01) (W/M)
C. Hatton Humphrey, Developer
Fisher, Towne & Associates
716-839-2141 x336
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Benjamin Falloon [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Monday, February 18, 2002 12:51 PM
> To: CF-Community
> Subject: Re: jihad for kids .. wheeee
>
>
> > Well, I disagree that they aren't normal people. Few of them come from
> > privileged backgrounds (as if that defines not-normal). Bush's
> cabinet is
> > the most racially diverse in history. Many of the millionaires
> club are of
> > the self-made type.
>
> Yep.... majority rich white males....
> Here are the stats:
>
> 12 white males (13 if you include GW).
> 3 white females.
> 1 African American female. (although Rice isnt in this photo)
> 2 African American Males.
> 1 Asian female.
> 1 Asian Male.
>
> Benjamin
>
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "CF-Community" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2002 4:39 AM
> Subject: RE: jihad for kids .. wheeee
>
>
> > Well, I disagree that they aren't normal people. Few of them come from
> > privileged backgrounds (as if that defines not-normal). Bush's
> cabinet is
> > the most racially diverse in history. Many of the millionaires
> club are of
> > the self-made type.
> >
> > If a poor person was on the cabinet, would he have his own self interest
> at
> > heart?
> >
> > It's hard to serve without totally removing self interest, isn't it?
> >
> > The most powerful people in Washington are always, whether GOP or Dem,
> > always going to be people who got there through self interest.
> That's why
> we
> > have a system of checks and balances.
> >
> > H.
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Will Swain [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Monday, February 18, 2002 9:29 AM
> > To: CF-Community
> > Subject: RE: jihad for kids .. wheeee
> >
> >
> > its not wrong per se. But you must agree that these people on the whole
> will
> > have absolutely no idea of the issues facing normal people.
> Also, the fact
> > that they are so wealthy suggests to me that they might have their own
> self
> > interests at heart.
> >
> > will
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: 18 February 2002 17:26
> > To: CF-Community
> > Subject: RE: jihad for kids .. wheeee
> >
> >
> > And this is wrong because?
> >
> > H.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Benjamin Falloon [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Monday, February 18, 2002 9:19 AM
> > To: CF-Community
> > Subject: Re: jihad for kids .. wheeee
> >
> >
> > I'd say the political system makes it difficult for a lot of
> Americans to
> > even relate, let alone get good representation..... for example....
> >
> > George W. and his cabinet....
> >
> > (This was from Adbusters...)
> >
> > Question: There are nineteen members of the Bush Administration cabinet.
> How
> > many are millionaires?
> >
> > a) 5
> > b)10
> > c) 18
> >
> >
> > Answer: c) 18. And seven members of the cabinet are worth more than $10
> > Million.
> >
> > (I wonder if these people have a hard time relating to societies
> > disadvantaged...)
> >
> > Benjamin
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Will Swain" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To: "CF-Community" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2002 4:02 AM
> > Subject: RE: jihad for kids .. wheeee
> >
> >
> > > Fair point that we are talking about apples and pears maybe,
> but how is
> > > alienation a choice on the part of the alienated?
> > >
> > > The political system is failing poeple if they feel alienated from it.
> As
> > > for your comment about not wanting everyone to vote, particularly less
> > > educated poeple, I think that is a very very dangerous
> precedent to set
> > for
> > > obvious reasons.
> > >
> > > will
> > >
> > > by the way, I am thoroughly enjoying this debate. Thanks.
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > > Sent: 18 February 2002 16:57
> > > To: CF-Community
> > > Subject: RE: jihad for kids .. wheeee
> > >
> > >
> > > Will Mugabe be elected in a free electoral system where every person
> > > qualified (based on a neutral qualification standard, such as age) is
> > > allowed to vote, to vote secretly, and choose between candidates of
> > > different opinions/stances/agendas?
> > >
> > > If we're going to compare elections, let's be sure we're comparing
> apples
> > to
> > > apples.
> > >
> > > As for America or Britain, alienation is a choice. A free choice. If
> > people
> > > choose not to vote, that has no bearing on the legitimacy of the
> election.
> > > Hell, it enhances it.
> > >
> > > H.
> > >
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Will Swain [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > > Sent: Monday, February 18, 2002 8:33 AM
> > > To: CF-Community
> > > Subject: RE: jihad for kids .. wheeee
> > >
> > >
> > > I'm questioning the democractic nature of the US political system, and
> the
> > > British one while I'm at it. I didn't think democracy was the voice of
> > those
> > > who don't feel so alienated by politics that they vote? Winning is the
> > > mandate to rule you say? So when Mugabe wins that will be enough, he
> will
> > > have a mandate to rule?
> > >
> > > will
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > > Sent: 18 February 2002 16:26
> > > To: CF-Community
> > > Subject: RE: jihad for kids .. wheeee
> > >
> > >
> > > Winning is the mandate to rule. In a representative
> government, that's
> > all
> > > you need.
> > >
> > > Getting a majority of the votes (in a three-way election) is
> irrelevant.
> > > Getting a majority of all registered voters is even more irrelevant.
> > >
> > > I don't really get you're point, however. What does this have to do
> with
> > > democracies being careful? There is no democratic code that says all
> > people
> > > must vote. In fact, not voting is a form of voting. Furthermore, I
> don't
> > > want all people to vote. Too many people who are ill-informed vote
> already
> > > any way. Of course, that's their choice, but I don't believe
> democracy
> > > suffers when people choose not to vote. The nice thing about a free
> > society
> > > is that you can choose not to participate in the civic
> process if that's
> > > what floats your boat. People should be free to choose that option
> without
> > > being made out to be cretins.
> > >
> > > H.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Will Swain [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > > Sent: Monday, February 18, 2002 2:25 AM
> > > To: CF-Community
> > > Subject: RE: jihad for kids .. wheeee
> > >
> > >
> > > I see what you are saying but I do worry that there is a dangerous
> > > undercurrent lurking in the background there. Like maybe we could just
> ask
> > > them what they think about it? Otherwise it is simply a case of a
> dominant
> > > culture imposing it's values on everyone else. Yes, it might
> be from the
> > > best motivations, but I think you could see the arrogance there.
> > > Furthermore, I think you are on very dangerous ground with your
> assertion
> > > that "A government that is formed from a mandate from the masses (and
> not
> > > from some farcical aquatic ceremony) is the only way to go." Again,
> > imposing
> > > a morality and world view on others. Who is to say that a benevolent
> > > dictatorship is not a better way to live?
> > >
> > > Also, I think we who live in 'democratic' countries should be very
> > careful.
> > > After all, is it not true that less than half the population of the US
> > voted
> > > in the last election, and arguably less than half of those who did
> > actually
> > > voted for Bush? Hardly a mandate to rule?
> > >
> > > will
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Lon Lentz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > > Sent: 15 February 2002 23:32
> > > To: CF-Community
> > > Subject: RE: jihad for kids .. wheeee
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > I will never accept the premise that "correct" and "right" are
> > > subjective. They are not.
> > >
> > > Killing is not necessarily wrong. Murder is wrong. Completely
> > > different. If killing is "wrong", then why do we hire "cops",
> give them
> > > badges and guns, and allow them to "kill" in our name? Why do
> we let the
> > > state "kill" in our name? Why do we let the US military "kill" in our
> > > name? There is no subjectiveness here. There is only absolute.
> > >
> > > I am not in anyway trying to suggest that we shove our
> western ideals
> > > down their throats. A government that is formed from a
> mandate from the
> > > masses (and not from some farcical aquatic ceremony) is the
> only way to
> > > go. That is absolute. However they choose to do it.
> > >
> > > Proper human behavior is right and just. No matter where
> you live. No
> > > matter what religion you follow. No matter your ethnic background.
> > >
> > > Would you suggest that the female castrations that go on in Africa,
> > > could in some way, be "right" or "correct" for those people? I don't
> > > care what kind of society they have, that is wrong.
> > >
> > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: chris.alvarado [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > > > Sent: Friday, February 15, 2002 5:01 PM
> > > > To: CF-Community
> > > > Subject: Re: jihad for kids .. wheeee
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > no I'm suggesting exactly what I stated.
> > > >
> > > > Absolutes are absolutely wrong.
> > > >
> > > > case in point:
> > > >
> > > > Killing is wrong.
> > > >
> > > > Killing in self defense, is that wrong?
> > > >
> > > > most people would tend to say no, if the choice is kill or
> be killed,
> > > and
> > > > that is the only way, then killing in self defense is not "wrong",
> > > which
> > > > completely contradicts the first statement: 'killing is wrong'.
> > > Killing is
> > > > killing no matter how pretty you try to paint it.
> > > >
> > > > "right" and "wrong" is all a matter of perception.
> > > >
> > > > believing that something is right or wrong does not make it so.
> > > >
> > > > I believe that the events that occurred on 9/11 and some of
> the events
> > > > thereafter were "wrong" but that does not make it universally so.
> > > >
> > > > Who put you, or me for that matter in charge of dictating what is
> > > right or
> > > > wrong?
> > > >
> > > > Freedom is not just about living the way you want to live, it is
> > > > about being
> > > > able to also acknowledge the way others choose to live whether you
> > > agree
> > > > with it or not.
> > > >
> > > > Unconventional thought? perhaps, but this country's ideals were
> > > founded on
> > > > what was considered to be unconventional / 'unpopular' thinking.
> > > >
> > > > in short, what is right for you, may not be right for others, I'm
> > > > not saying
> > > > that about freedom or any one thing in particular. I'm saying, in
> > > general.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
______________________________________________________________________
Macromedia ColdFusion 5 Training from the Source
Step by Step ColdFusion
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0201758474/houseoffusion
Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
