that would make clinton's cabinet more multi-race than gwb's....
----- Original Message ----- From: "C. Hatton Humphrey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "CF-Community" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2002 5:49 AM Subject: RE: jihad for kids .. wheeee > 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. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ______________________________________________________________________ Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the official book at http://www.fusionauthority.com/bkinfo.cfm Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
