Re: USA presidential race(ism)
PVt. PV wrote: technically birth place is a common denominator of citizenship and the colonial empire provided limited citizenship to white males at the time of founding the nation --- the ideas of racism in us politics has a richer and greater history. The first president espoused freedom while owning slaves and one of the so-called greatest democratic minds and founder of the Jeffersonian principles laid with the slave women called miss Sally Henson but could not marry her. the unifying principle related to presidential politics is not the place of the birth of the candidates but how well will they serve the powers that control the nation. This was began by those who exeuted one of the greats coups in the history of the world. They happen to be white males bounded by masonic oaths and today the planter class have been replaced by the steel and oil industralist and those who could amply serve the Carnegies and Rockerfellers rose to the positions of president in the most modern nation. the present rise of the American intellectuals the likes of the Clintons, Colin Power, Congolesa Rice, Barack Obama reflect the change in national politics where the powerful intellect is paid to serve the ruling class and bam boozle the middle while the old industrial military machine seek a proper role in the emerging and competing world---So the intellectual off spring has a day in the sun or American politics where racism is still a great selling point in this class society! [Pvt. PV.] -- Original message from Lance A. Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED]: -- John Garcia wrote: technically, the first seven Presidents were born in what was at the time, colonies of the British Empire. the first President to be born after the US became an independent country was Martin Van Buren. John McCain was born in the Panama Canal Zone to a serving US Navy officer and is considered a natural born citizen. Barack Obama was born in Hawaii after it became a state. until the Constitution is changed to permit naturalized citizens to become President, no one born in Austria will be elected President. What about offspring of someone in the U.S. Foreign Service in Austria working at the U.S. embassy, for example? --[Lance] -- GPG Fingerprint: 409B A409 A38D 92BF 15D9 6EEE 9A82 F2AC 69AC 07B9 CACert.org Assurer ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
USA presidential race(ism)
Both McCain and Obama were born outside of the continental USA (Panama and Hawaii, respectively). I don't know too much about USA history, but was there any POTUS that was not born in the continental USA? Maybe the next one will be born even outsider (like Austria...) Alberto Monteiro ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: USA presidential race(ism)
On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 3:34 PM, Alberto Monteiro [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Both McCain and Obama were born outside of the continental USA (Panama and Hawaii, respectively). I don't know too much about USA history, but was there any POTUS that was not born in the continental USA? Maybe the next one will be born even outsider (like Austria...) Alberto Monteiro ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l technically, the first seven Presidents were born in what was at the time, colonies of the British Empire. the first President to be born after the US became an independent country was Martin Van Buren. John McCain was born in the Panama Canal Zone to a serving US Navy officer and is considered a natural born citizen. Barack Obama was born in Hawaii after it became a state. until the Constitution is changed to permit naturalized citizens to become President, no one born in Austria will be elected President. john ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: USA presidential race(ism)
John Garcia wrote: technically, the first seven Presidents were born in what was at the time, colonies of the British Empire. the first President to be born after the US became an independent country was Martin Van Buren. John McCain was born in the Panama Canal Zone to a serving US Navy officer and is considered a natural born citizen. Barack Obama was born in Hawaii after it became a state. until the Constitution is changed to permit naturalized citizens to become President, no one born in Austria will be elected President. What about offspring of someone in the U.S. Foreign Service in Austria working at the U.S. embassy, for example? --[Lance] -- GPG Fingerprint: 409B A409 A38D 92BF 15D9 6EEE 9A82 F2AC 69AC 07B9 CACert.org Assurer ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
RE: USA presidential race(ism)
Cue Bruce Springsteenhttp://idiotgrrl.livejournal.com/ Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2008 15:48:18 -0400 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: brin-l@mccmedia.com Subject: Re: USA presidential race(ism) On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 3:34 PM, Alberto Monteiro [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Both McCain and Obama were born outside of the continental USA (Panama and Hawaii, respectively). I don't know too much about USA history, but was there any POTUS that was not born in the continental USA? Maybe the next one will be born even outsider (like Austria...) Alberto Monteiro ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l technically, the first seven Presidents were born in what was at the time, colonies of the British Empire. the first President to be born after the US became an independent country was Martin Van Buren. John McCain was born in the Panama Canal Zone to a serving US Navy officer and is considered a natural born citizen. Barack Obama was born in Hawaii after it became a state. until the Constitution is changed to permit naturalized citizens to become President, no one born in Austria will be elected President. john ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: USA presidential race(ism)
afaik, that person would be just like McCain, considered to be a natural-born citizen. john On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 3:54 PM, Lance A. Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: John Garcia wrote: technically, the first seven Presidents were born in what was at the time, colonies of the British Empire. the first President to be born after the US became an independent country was Martin Van Buren. John McCain was born in the Panama Canal Zone to a serving US Navy officer and is considered a natural born citizen. Barack Obama was born in Hawaii after it became a state. until the Constitution is changed to permit naturalized citizens to become President, no one born in Austria will be elected President. What about offspring of someone in the U.S. Foreign Service in Austria working at the U.S. embassy, for example? --[Lance] -- GPG Fingerprint: 409B A409 A38D 92BF 15D9 6EEE 9A82 F2AC 69AC 07B9 CACert.org Assurer ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: USA presidential race(ism)
On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 3:56 PM, John Garcia [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: afaik, that person would be just like McCain, considered to be a natural-born citizen. john On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 3:54 PM, Lance A. Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: John Garcia wrote: technically, the first seven Presidents were born in what was at the time, colonies of the British Empire. the first President to be born after the US became an independent country was Martin Van Buren. John McCain was born in the Panama Canal Zone to a serving US Navy officer and is considered a natural born citizen. Barack Obama was born in Hawaii after it became a state. until the Constitution is changed to permit naturalized citizens to become President, no one born in Austria will be elected President. What about offspring of someone in the U.S. Foreign Service in Austria working at the U.S. embassy, for example? --[Lance] -- GPG Fingerprint: 409B A409 A38D 92BF 15D9 6EEE 9A82 F2AC 69AC 07B9 CACert.org Assurer ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l sorry for the top posting. i found a little more data from www.usconstitution.net, to quote: *Natural-born citizen* Who is a natural-born citizen? Who, in other words, is a citizen at birth, such that that person can be a President someday? The 14th Amendment http://www.usconstitution.net/xconst_Am14.html defines citizenship this way: All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. But even this does not get specific enough. As usual, the Constitution provides the framework for the law, but it is the law that fills in the gaps. Currently, Title 8 of the U.S. Code fills in those gaps. Section 1401http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode08/usc_sec_08_1401000-.htmldefines the following as people who are citizens of the United States at birth: - Anyone born inside the United States - Any Indian or Eskimo born in the United States, provided being a citizen of the U.S. does not impair the person's status as a citizen of the tribe - Any one born outside the United States, both of whose parents are citizens of the U.S., as long as one parent has lived in the U.S. - Any one born outside the United States, if one parent is a citizen and lived in the U.S. for at least one year and the other parent is a U.S. national - Any one born in a U.S. possession, if one parent is a citizen and lived in the U.S. for at least one year - Any one found in the U.S. under the age of five, whose parentage cannot be determined, as long as proof of non-citizenship is not provided by age 21 - Any one born outside the United States, if one parent is an alien and as long as the other parent is a citizen of the U.S. who lived in the U.S. for at least five years (with military and diplomatic service included in this time) - A final, historical condition: a person born before 5/24/1934 of an alien father and a U.S. citizen mother who has lived in the U.S. Anyone falling into these categories is considered natural-born, and is eligible to run for President or Vice President. These provisions allow the children of military families to be considered natural-born, for example. Separate sections handle territories that the United States has acquired over time, such as Puerto Rico (8 USC 1402http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode08/usc_sec_08_1402000-.html), Alaska (8 USC 1404http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode08/usc_sec_08_1404000-.html), Hawaii (8 USC 1405http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode08/usc_sec_08_1405000-.html), the U.S. Virgin Islands (8 USC 1406http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode08/usc_sec_08_1406000-.html), and Guam (8 USC 1407http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode08/usc_sec_08_1407000-.html). Each of these sections confer citizenship on persons living in these territories as of a certain date, and usually confer natural-born status on persons born in those territories after that date. For example, for Puerto Rico, all persons born in Puerto Rico between April 11, 1899, and January 12, 1941, are automatically conferred citizenship as of the date the law was signed by the President (June 27, 1952). Additionally, all persons born in Puerto Rico on or after January 13, 1941, are natural-born citizens of the United States. Note that because of when the law was passed, for some, the natural-born status was retroactive. The law contains one other section of historical note, concerning the Panama Canal Zone and the nation of Panama. In 8 USC 1403http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode08/usc_sec_08_1403000-.html, the law states that anyone born in the Canal Zone or in Panama itself, on or after February 26, 1904, to a mother and/or father who
Re: USA presidential race(ism)
John Garcia quoted: Separate sections handle territories that the United States has acquired over time, Ouch! Too bad, the one I am thinking was born _outside_ the USA, but _almost_ in a area under USA occupation: just look at the maps here... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allied-administered_Austria ... and there... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thal%2C_Austria Alberto Monteiro ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: USA presidential race(ism)
On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 4:23 PM, Alberto Monteiro [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: John Garcia quoted: Separate sections handle territories that the United States has acquired over time, Ouch! Too bad, the one I am thinking was born _outside_ the USA, but _almost_ in a area under USA occupation: just look at the maps here... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allied-administered_Austria ... and there... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thal%2C_Austria Alberto Monteiro ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l things might have been different if we had kept Austria after ww2 and not given it back. otoh, what would we have done with it? john manifest destiny maru ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: USA Presidential Race
jon wrote: People are running for an office, but it's barely worth my time to vote at all. I'm certainly not going to do any research on the candidates. (Think Dogcatcher, or the Board of Directors of that company you have one share in, ...) In that case, I routinely vote for women. (Since one can almost always tell candidates' genders from their names.) I don't usually extend this to ethnicities, but I guess I'm less likely to vote for Reginald Chumley III than for John Smith. Although that's not really ethnic; the former could have chosen to go by RJ Chumley, after all. ---David Restoring the balance, Maru what i said doesn't make me a bigot, ronn, just someone who would like to see affirmative action at the presidential level. when whites votes for whites, to PREVENT a black man from being elected, THAT is racist... jon I don't always agree with Ronn, but count me as one who doesn't believe that affirmative action is the right track. It's the old two wrongs don't make a right saw, IMO. That said, I don't see anything wrong with considering the perspective that an African-American (or a woman or a Hispanic etc.) might have as _one_ of the criteria I'm looking for in a Presidential candidate. Right now though, I'd vote for Howdy Doody before I'd vote for anyone that called themselves a Republican. Doug ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
USA Presidential Race
People are running for an office, but it's barely worth my time to vote at all. I'm certainly not going to do any research on the candidates. (Think Dogcatcher, or the Board of Directors of that company you have one share in, ...) In that case, I routinely vote for women. (Since one can almost always tell candidates' genders from their names.) I don't usually extend this to ethnicities, but I guess I'm less likely to vote for Reginald Chumley III than for John Smith. Although that's not really ethnic; the former could have chosen to go by RJ Chumley, after all. ---David what i said doesn't make me a bigot, ronn, just someone who would like to see affirmative action at the presidential level. when whites votes for whites, to PREVENT a black man from being elected, THAT is racist... jon I don't always agree with Ronn, but count me as one who doesn't believe that affirmative action is the right track. It's the old two wrongs don't make a right saw, IMO. That said, I don't see anything wrong with considering the perspective that an African-American (or a woman or a Hispanic etc.) might have as _one_ of the criteria I'm looking for in a Presidential candidate. Right now though, I'd vote for Howdy Doody before I'd vote for anyone that called themselves a Republican. Doug i would vote for al sharpton, jesse jackson, or even ron paul over so called maverick republican, john mc cain. at least in this election we finally have a democratic candidate who will represent voters over special interests... jon ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: USA Presidential Race
On Jun 11, 2008, at 8:24 PM, jon louis mann wrote: at least in this election we finally have a democratic candidate who will represent voters over special interests... And as an extra bonus, one whose voice I can stand to hear on the radio or TV for the next four years, who knows how to speak English (quite brilliantly, as it turns out) and is very, very unlikely to describe himself as the decider. Dave I'll be long gone before some smart person ever figures out what happened inside this Oval Office. -— George W. Bush, Washington, D.C., May 12, 2008 Thank God Maru ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: USA Presidential Race
On 10/06/2008, at 11:18 AM, Ronn! Blankenship wrote: i am voting for obama BECAUSE he is black; many more will vote for mc cain to prevent a black man from winning... Sorry if this comes as news to you, but that makes you just as much of a racist bigot as they are. Not so. Believing that a (half) black guy or a woman reaching the office of PoTUS will do wonders to heal some of America's scars and voting accordingly does not make one racist or sexist, necessarily. 43 Presidents so far, all rich white guys. 43 VPs, the same. Thinking that maybe it's time to redress that slightly is not *necessarily* racist, it's inclusive. Charlie. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: USA Presidential Race
On 10/06/2008, at 1:10 PM, Wayne Eddy wrote: If he had three grandparents that were white, would he be black, brown, gray, white or a person? He'd still be black, apparently. No, I don't get it either. All I know is he's a smart guy with a face that people outside the states (apart from Nick Griffin and his ilk) will see as different to those that have gone before. Charlie. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: USA Presidential Race
On 10 Jun 2008, at 04:10, Wayne Eddy wrote: I am curious why Obama is being categorised as black? Given that his father was black and his mother is white, surely he is brown, or more to the point a person or an American? If he had three grandparents that were white, would he be black, brown, gray, white or a person? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One-drop_rule The one-drop rule is an historical colloquial term in the United States that holds that a person with any trace of African ancestry (however small or invisible) cannot be considered white and so, unless the person has an alternative non-white ancestry that he or she can claim, such as Native American, Asian, Arab, Australian aboriginal, the person must be considered black. African origin Maru -- William T Goodall Mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED] Web : http://www.wtgab.demon.co.uk Blog : http://radio.weblogs.com/0111221/ Debunking bullshit is a thankless task. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: USA Presidential Race
Rob wrote: In 2004 I posted about this new guy named Barack Obama, something about how he was an up and comer and the kind of guy I wanted to be President. (At least I know I've been saying all that in a lot of places throughout the last 4 years.) It's in the archives somewhere. And probably everybody thought you were misspelling Osama... Alberto Monteiro PS: it would be nice to see how Obama would be able to visit any fanatical muslim country, as he is targeted to be executed for apostasy (OTOH, nothing happened to argentinian Menem...) ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: USA Presidential Race
Wayne Eddy wrote: I am curious why Obama is being categorised as black? Given that his father was black and his mother is white, surely he is brown, or more to the point a person or an American? If he had three grandparents that were white, would he be black, brown, gray, white or a person? In Brazil, we would call him mulato - it's a highly racism term, that comes from mule; it's racist not because it's a reference to Cyrus The Great, but because it's not used for white/native or black/native mixes. BTW, I imagine that Nostradamists are avidly seeking predictions about a mule reigning in the West... Alberto Monteiro ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: USA Presidential Race
Dave Land wrote: It should be made very, very clear that I was raised in a highly racist culture, and find racism to be extremely abhorrent, even as -- or perhaps better, especially as -- I acknowledge that it lives within me. My grandmother was like this. She was highly racist (because of education), while, at the same time, totally aware that racism is Evil, so she had to always qualify her racist remarks with an anti-racist speech. BTW, I was also raised in a highly homophobic culture... Alberto Monteiro ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: USA Presidential Race
At 04:17 AM Tuesday 6/10/2008, William T Goodall wrote: On 10 Jun 2008, at 04:10, Wayne Eddy wrote: I am curious why Obama is being categorised as black? AFAICT the principal reason is that he is the only candidate since the founding of the nation who has gotten this far in the race for POTUS who is known to have at least one black parent rather than being as far as everyone knows a descendent of 100% white ancestors. Given that his father was black and his mother is white, surely he is brown, or more to the point a person or an American? If he had three grandparents that were white, would he be black, brown, gray, white or a person? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One-drop_rule The one-drop rule is an historical colloquial term in the United States that holds that a person with any trace of African ancestry (however small or invisible) cannot be considered white and so, unless the person has an alternative non-white ancestry that he or she can claim, such as Native American, Asian, Arab, Australian aboriginal, the person must be considered black. African origin Maru The fact that multiple people have brought up the one-drop rule in response to Wayne's question is sufficient explanation of why it should be emphasized in the strongest possible terms that there is only one race human and we should not consider the skin color of an individual or his/her ancestors as a more important criterion in choosing a political candidate (or a person for employment) than his or her actual qualifications for the position. Debunking bullshit is a thankless task. Apparently this is also quite true when bulls**t = racism of any sort. . . . ronn! :) ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: USA Presidential Race
Ronn! Blankenship wrote: At 09:04 AM Monday 6/9/2008, John Garcia wrote: On Fri, Jun 6, 2008 at 3:13 PM, Alberto Monteiro [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: John Garcia wrote: Now that it looks like it's McCain vs. Obama (listed in alphabetical order) I was wondering what you all think of this matchup. I'm especially interested in what our friends from outside of the USA think. Here in Brazil it seems that McCain will easily win, and that Obama is like a fringe candidate, just there to prove that Dems aren't racist bigots (and Hillary was there just to prove the non-sexism). Alberto Monteiro ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l Hmmm. That's interesting. Last summer, someone asked me who I thought would be the next President and I replied Some rich white guy. Now that I've heard Obama, I do think that he has a very good chance of being elected. Just how many voters will either vote for McCain or stay home is unknown. Not very many people are willing to give what may be seen as a racist answer to pollsters. Is the implication that voters must either vote for Obama or be bigots, iow, the only reason anyone would not vote for Obama is because he is black and they are racist? . . . ronn! :) I don't know exactly what John Garcia intended, but I took this to be a reference to the well known Bradley Effect (sometimes called the Wilder Effect) in which the polls project a higher vote for black candidates than what ultimately materializes. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bradley_effect I have trouble explaining this phenomenon without using racism, but others may be more ingenious than I. However, I think there is some evidence that it won't play such a big factor this year. At least in the primaries within the Democratic Party it looks to me like pre-election polls have been generally accurate within their margins of error. Regards, -- Kevin B. O'Brien TANSTAAFL [EMAIL PROTECTED] Linux User #333216 Conservatives are not necessarily stupid, but most stupid people are conservatives. -- John Stuart Mill ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: USA Presidential Race
At 10:10 PM Monday 6/9/2008, Wayne Eddy asked: I am curious why Obama is being categorised as black? Given that his father was black and his mother is white, surely he is brown, or more to the point a person or an American? If he had three grandparents that were white, would he be black, brown, gray, white or a person? Regards, Wayne Eddy. http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/06/09/btsc.obama.race/index.html?iref=mpstoryview (Read all the comments.) . . . ronn! :) ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: USA Presidential Race
On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 10:11 AM, Kevin B. O'Brien [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ronn! Blankenship wrote: At 09:04 AM Monday 6/9/2008, John Garcia wrote: On Fri, Jun 6, 2008 at 3:13 PM, Alberto Monteiro [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: John Garcia wrote: Now that it looks like it's McCain vs. Obama (listed in alphabetical order) I was wondering what you all think of this matchup. I'm especially interested in what our friends from outside of the USA think. Here in Brazil it seems that McCain will easily win, and that Obama is like a fringe candidate, just there to prove that Dems aren't racist bigots (and Hillary was there just to prove the non-sexism). Alberto Monteiro ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l Hmmm. That's interesting. Last summer, someone asked me who I thought would be the next President and I replied Some rich white guy. Now that I've heard Obama, I do think that he has a very good chance of being elected. Just how many voters will either vote for McCain or stay home is unknown. Not very many people are willing to give what may be seen as a racist answer to pollsters. Is the implication that voters must either vote for Obama or be bigots, iow, the only reason anyone would not vote for Obama is because he is black and they are racist? . . . ronn! :) I don't know exactly what John Garcia intended, but I took this to be a reference to the well known Bradley Effect (sometimes called the Wilder Effect) in which the polls project a higher vote for black candidates than what ultimately materializes. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bradley_effect I have trouble explaining this phenomenon without using racism, but others may be more ingenious than I. However, I think there is some evidence that it won't play such a big factor this year. At least in the primaries within the Democratic Party it looks to me like pre-election polls have been generally accurate within their margins of error. Regards, -- Kevin B. O'Brien TANSTAAFL [EMAIL PROTECTED] Linux User #333216 Conservatives are not necessarily stupid, but most stupid people are conservatives. -- John Stuart Mill ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l That is what I was referring to. Thanks for clearing that up. john ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: USA Presidential Race
On 6/10/08, Ronn! Blankenship [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: At 04:17 AM Tuesday 6/10/2008, William T Goodall wrote: On 10 Jun 2008, at 04:10, Wayne Eddy wrote: I am curious why Obama is being categorised as black? AFAICT the principal reason is that he is the only candidate since the founding of the nation who has gotten this far in the race for POTUS who is known to have at least one black parent rather than being as far as everyone knows a descendent of 100% white ancestors. Warren G. Harding had black ancestors on both sides of his family. By the one drop definition, he would definitely have been a black president. I've read theories about other presidents... hang on a sec... ok, here's a link for you. http://www.diversityinc.com/public/3085.cfm This link lists Jefferson, Jackson, Lincoln, Harding, and Coolidge as presidents who had or may have had African ancestry (as the article calls it). -- Mauro Diotallevi Alcohol and calculus don't mix. Don't drink and derive. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
USA Presidential Race
In the America in which I grew up: Pittsburgh, PA in the 60s and 70s, if you had one drop of (N-word) blood in you, you were a (N-word). Plain and simple. I am not even slightly surprised that there is plenty of that going on even today. Dave back in 1962, when i was in the us navy, there was a fellow, whose name, by some bizarre coincidence, was james baldwin, who looked very white to me (hazel eyes, straight brown hair, etc...) was actually an octaroon. on his dog tags he was classified as negro, against his wishes... i am half hispanic, and also look very white, but i have an anglo last name, and don't speak spanish, so on my orders, etc. i was caucasian. the navy did insist on labeling me as protestant, even though i declared my self an atheist. jon ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
USA Presidential Race
i am voting for obama BECAUSE he is black; many more will vote for mc cain to prevent a black man from winning... jon Sorry if this comes as news to you, but that makes you just as much of a racist bigot as they are. As the people who voted for Hillary just because she was a woman were just as much sexist as those who voted against her just because she was a woman. Ronn-- I don't know, I guess it depends on your definition of racist. If it means taking race into account for any reason at all, then I guess you're right. But I don't think you can make bigot stick. I don't know if Jon meant this by putting the two clauses together, but it's something I've been doing for years. I recognize that certain ethnic etc groups are less likely to get votes because of voter prejudice. In the absence of other information, I usually vote the other way with the intent of restoring fairness. I doubt that Jon really has an absence of information, so he may have other reasons. But here's my example: People are running for an office, but it's barely worth my time to vote at all. I'm certainly not going to do any research on the candidates. (Think Dogcatcher, or the Board of Directors of that company you have one share in, ...) In that case, I routinely vote for women. (Since one can almost always tell candidates' genders from their names.) I don't usually extend this to ethnicities, but I guess I'm less likely to vote for Reginald Chumley III than for John Smith. Although that's not really ethnic; the former could have chosen to go by RJ Chumley, after all. ---David Restoring the balance, Maru what i said doesn't make me a bigot, ronn, just someone who would like to see affirmative action at the presidential level. when whites votes for whites, to PREVENT a black man from being elected, THAT is racist... jon ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: USA Presidential Race
On Fri, Jun 6, 2008 at 3:13 PM, Alberto Monteiro [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: John Garcia wrote: Now that it looks like it's McCain vs. Obama (listed in alphabetical order) I was wondering what you all think of this matchup. I'm especially interested in what our friends from outside of the USA think. Here in Brazil it seems that McCain will easily win, and that Obama is like a fringe candidate, just there to prove that Dems aren't racist bigots (and Hillary was there just to prove the non-sexism). Alberto Monteiro ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l Hmmm. That's interesting. Last summer, someone asked me who I thought would be the next President and I replied Some rich white guy. Now that I've heard Obama, I do think that he has a very good chance of being elected. Just how many voters will either vote for McCain or stay home is unknown. Not very many people are willing to give what may be seen as a racist answer to pollsters. Having said that, Obama may have attracted enough new voters to offset the bigots. It'll be something to watch. john ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: USA Presidential Race
At 09:04 AM Monday 6/9/2008, John Garcia wrote: On Fri, Jun 6, 2008 at 3:13 PM, Alberto Monteiro [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: John Garcia wrote: Now that it looks like it's McCain vs. Obama (listed in alphabetical order) I was wondering what you all think of this matchup. I'm especially interested in what our friends from outside of the USA think. Here in Brazil it seems that McCain will easily win, and that Obama is like a fringe candidate, just there to prove that Dems aren't racist bigots (and Hillary was there just to prove the non-sexism). Alberto Monteiro ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l Hmmm. That's interesting. Last summer, someone asked me who I thought would be the next President and I replied Some rich white guy. Now that I've heard Obama, I do think that he has a very good chance of being elected. Just how many voters will either vote for McCain or stay home is unknown. Not very many people are willing to give what may be seen as a racist answer to pollsters. Is the implication that voters must either vote for Obama or be bigots, iow, the only reason anyone would not vote for Obama is because he is black and they are racist? . . . ronn! :) ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: USA Presidential Race
On Mon, Jun 9, 2008 at 6:54 PM, Ronn! Blankenship [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: At 09:04 AM Monday 6/9/2008, John Garcia wrote: On Fri, Jun 6, 2008 at 3:13 PM, Alberto Monteiro [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: John Garcia wrote: Now that it looks like it's McCain vs. Obama (listed in alphabetical order) I was wondering what you all think of this matchup. I'm especially interested in what our friends from outside of the USA think. Here in Brazil it seems that McCain will easily win, and that Obama is like a fringe candidate, just there to prove that Dems aren't racist bigots (and Hillary was there just to prove the non-sexism). Alberto Monteiro ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l Hmmm. That's interesting. Last summer, someone asked me who I thought would be the next President and I replied Some rich white guy. Now that I've heard Obama, I do think that he has a very good chance of being elected. Just how many voters will either vote for McCain or stay home is unknown. Not very many people are willing to give what may be seen as a racist answer to pollsters. Is the implication that voters must either vote for Obama or be bigots, iow, the only reason anyone would not vote for Obama is because he is black and they are racist? . . . ronn! :) ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l No, and I don't mean to give that impression, if I did, I'm sorry. Certainly, there are those who will not vote for Obama because they disagree with his policies, or consider McCain to be a better candidate for President. That doesn't make them bigots or racist. But there are some who will automatically vote against him because of his race, just as there are some who will vote against McCain because of his. john ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
USA Presidential Race
Last summer, someone asked me who I thought would be the next President and I replied Some rich white guy. Now that I've heard Obama, I do think that he has a very good chance of being elected. Just how many voters will either vote for McCain or stay home is unknown. Not very many people are willing to give what may be seen as a racist answer to pollsters. Having said that, Obama may have attracted enough new voters to offset the bigots. It'll be something to watch. john i hate to say this, but i'm terribly afraid that something will happen to obama before november. the character assassination is not even in full swing, yet... the gop wanted him to be the nominee for a reason; just like they wanted mc govern in 1972. easier to defeat, even for a war monger like mc cain. i am not one to subscribe to 9/11, bilderberg consperacies, but one has to worry there is a certain amount of truth that there are rogue elements out there up to no good... jon ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
USA Presidential Race
Is the implication that voters must either vote for Obama or be bigots, iow, the only reason anyone would not vote for Obama is because he is black and they are racist? . . . ronn! :) i am voting for obama BECAUSE he is black; many more will vote for mc cain to prevent a black man from winning... ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: USA Presidential Race
- Original Message - From: John Garcia [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Killer Bs (David Brin et al) Discussion brin-l@mccmedia.com Sent: Monday, June 09, 2008 9:04 AM Subject: Re: USA Presidential Race On Fri, Jun 6, 2008 at 3:13 PM, Alberto Monteiro [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: John Garcia wrote: Now that it looks like it's McCain vs. Obama (listed in alphabetical order) I was wondering what you all think of this matchup. I'm especially interested in what our friends from outside of the USA think. Here in Brazil it seems that McCain will easily win, and that Obama is like a fringe candidate, just there to prove that Dems aren't racist bigots (and Hillary was there just to prove the non-sexism). Alberto Monteiro ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l Hmmm. That's interesting. Last summer, someone asked me who I thought would be the next President and I replied Some rich white guy. Now that I've heard Obama, I do think that he has a very good chance of being elected. Just how many voters will either vote for McCain or stay home is unknown. Not very many people are willing to give what may be seen as a racist answer to pollsters. Having said that, Obama may have attracted enough new voters to offset the bigots. It'll be something to watch. In 2004 I posted about this new guy named Barack Obama, something about how he was an up and comer and the kind of guy I wanted to be President. (At least I know I've been saying all that in a lot of places throughout the last 4 years.) It's in the archives somewhere. xponent 2004 DNC Maru rob ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: USA Presidential Race
At 07:00 PM Monday 6/9/2008, John Garcia wrote: On Mon, Jun 9, 2008 at 6:54 PM, Ronn! Blankenship [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: At 09:04 AM Monday 6/9/2008, John Garcia wrote: On Fri, Jun 6, 2008 at 3:13 PM, Alberto Monteiro [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: John Garcia wrote: Now that it looks like it's McCain vs. Obama (listed in alphabetical order) I was wondering what you all think of this matchup. I'm especially interested in what our friends from outside of the USA think. Here in Brazil it seems that McCain will easily win, and that Obama is like a fringe candidate, just there to prove that Dems aren't racist bigots (and Hillary was there just to prove the non-sexism). Alberto Monteiro ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l Hmmm. That's interesting. Last summer, someone asked me who I thought would be the next President and I replied Some rich white guy. Now that I've heard Obama, I do think that he has a very good chance of being elected. Just how many voters will either vote for McCain or stay home is unknown. Not very many people are willing to give what may be seen as a racist answer to pollsters. Is the implication that voters must either vote for Obama or be bigots, iow, the only reason anyone would not vote for Obama is because he is black and they are racist? . . . ronn! :) ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l No, and I don't mean to give that impression, if I did, I'm sorry. And I didn't mean to imply that you did. I just wanted to call attention to the problem of race that threatens to overshadow the real issues of the current race. (;)) Certainly, there are those who will not vote for Obama because they disagree with his policies, or consider McCain to be a better candidate for President. That doesn't make them bigots or racist. Correctamundo! But there are some who will automatically vote against him because of his race, just as there are some who will vote against McCain because of his. And *both* groups are racist bigots. . . . ronn! :) ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: USA Presidential Race
At 07:32 PM Monday 6/9/2008, jon louis mann wrote: Is the implication that voters must either vote for Obama or be bigots, iow, the only reason anyone would not vote for Obama is because he is black and they are racist? . . . ronn! :) i am voting for obama BECAUSE he is black; many more will vote for mc cain to prevent a black man from winning... Sorry if this comes as news to you, but that makes you just as much of a racist bigot as they are. As the people who voted for Hillary just because she was a woman were just as much sexist as those who voted against her just because she was a woman. . . . ronn! :) ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: USA Presidential Race
Ronn! Blankenship wrote: At 07:32 PM Monday 6/9/2008, jon louis mann wrote: ... i am voting for obama BECAUSE he is black; many more will vote for mc cain to prevent a black man from winning... Sorry if this comes as news to you, but that makes you just as much of a racist bigot as they are. As the people who voted for Hillary just because she was a woman were just as much sexist as those who voted against her just because she was a woman. Ronn-- I don't know, I guess it depends on your definition of racist. If it means taking race into account for any reason at all, then I guess you're right. But I don't think you can make bigot stick. I don't know if Jon meant this by putting the two clauses together, but it's something I've been doing for years. I recognize that certain ethnic etc groups are less likely to get votes because of voter prejudice. In the absence of other information, I usually vote the other way with the intent of restoring fairness. I doubt that Jon really has an absence of information, so he may have other reasons. But here's my example: People are running for an office, but it's barely worth my time to vote at all. I'm certainly not going to do any research on the candidates. (Think Dogcatcher, or the Board of Directors of that company you have one share in, ...) In that case, I routinely vote for women. (Since one can almost always tell candidates' genders from their names.) I don't usually extend this to ethnicities, but I guess I'm less likely to vote for Reginald Chumley III than for John Smith. Although that's not really ethnic; the former could have chosen to go by RJ Chumley, after all. ---David Restoring the balance, Maru ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: USA Presidential Race
On Mon, Jun 9, 2008 at 9:12 PM, Ronn! Blankenship [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: At 07:00 PM Monday 6/9/2008, John Garcia wrote: On Mon, Jun 9, 2008 at 6:54 PM, Ronn! Blankenship [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: At 09:04 AM Monday 6/9/2008, John Garcia wrote: On Fri, Jun 6, 2008 at 3:13 PM, Alberto Monteiro [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: John Garcia wrote: Now that it looks like it's McCain vs. Obama (listed in alphabetical order) I was wondering what you all think of this matchup. I'm especially interested in what our friends from outside of the USA think. Here in Brazil it seems that McCain will easily win, and that Obama is like a fringe candidate, just there to prove that Dems aren't racist bigots (and Hillary was there just to prove the non-sexism). Alberto Monteiro ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l Hmmm. That's interesting. Last summer, someone asked me who I thought would be the next President and I replied Some rich white guy. Now that I've heard Obama, I do think that he has a very good chance of being elected. Just how many voters will either vote for McCain or stay home is unknown. Not very many people are willing to give what may be seen as a racist answer to pollsters. Is the implication that voters must either vote for Obama or be bigots, iow, the only reason anyone would not vote for Obama is because he is black and they are racist? . . . ronn! :) ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l No, and I don't mean to give that impression, if I did, I'm sorry. And I didn't mean to imply that you did. I just wanted to call attention to the problem of race that threatens to overshadow the real issues of the current race. (;)) Certainly, there are those who will not vote for Obama because they disagree with his policies, or consider McCain to be a better candidate for President. That doesn't make them bigots or racist. Correctamundo! But there are some who will automatically vote against him because of his race, just as there are some who will vote against McCain because of his. And *both* groups are racist bigots. . . . ronn! :) ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l Agreed. john ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: USA Presidential Race
- Original Message - From: jon louis mann [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Killer Bs (David Brin et al) Discussion brin-l@mccmedia.com Sent: Tuesday, June 10, 2008 10:32 AM Subject: USA Presidential Race Is the implication that voters must either vote for Obama or be bigots, iow, the only reason anyone would not vote for Obama is because he is black and they are racist? . . . ronn! :) i am voting for obama BECAUSE he is black; many more will vote for mc cain to prevent a black man from winning... I am curious why Obama is being categorised as black? Given that his father was black and his mother is white, surely he is brown, or more to the point a person or an American? If he had three grandparents that were white, would he be black, brown, gray, white or a person? Regards, Wayne Eddy. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: USA Presidential Race
At 10:10 PM Monday 6/9/2008, Wayne Eddy wrote: - Original Message - From: jon louis mann [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Killer Bs (David Brin et al) Discussion brin-l@mccmedia.com Sent: Tuesday, June 10, 2008 10:32 AM Subject: USA Presidential Race Is the implication that voters must either vote for Obama or be bigots, iow, the only reason anyone would not vote for Obama is because he is black and they are racist? . . . ronn! :) i am voting for obama BECAUSE he is black; many more will vote for mc cain to prevent a black man from winning... I am curious why Obama is being categorised as black? Given that his father was black and his mother is white, surely he is brown, or more to the point a person or an American? If he had three grandparents that were white, would he be black, brown, gray, white or a person? Human. . . . ronn! :) ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: USA Presidential Race
On Jun 9, 2008, at 5:32 PM, jon louis mann wrote: Is the implication that voters must either vote for Obama or be bigots, iow, the only reason anyone would not vote for Obama is because he is black and they are racist? . . . ronn! :) i am voting for obama BECAUSE he is black; many more will vote for mc cain to prevent a black man from winning... Here's an interesting Flash visualization of voting in the Democratic primaries by gender, race, age, income, and education (unfortunately, only one at a time): http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/flash/politics/20080603_MARGINS_GRAPHIC/margins.swf Or http://url.ie/fim As you step through each of the demographic groups, squares representing each of the fifty states shift left or right and stack up to represent each state's relative support for Obama vs. Clinton. As you step through income levels, you see a slight skew towards Clinton at the lower levels, towards Obama at the top, but all of this happens in pretty much normal bell-curve near the center of the graph. Same thing with education: less leaned towards Clinton, more towards Obama. The most striking thing of the whole visualization comes when you click Blacks and the whole chart -- all fifty states -- suddenly slams itself against the Obama side of the chart. It would seem that the group that is most voting by race is blacks, at least in the data gathered and displayed here. Gender didn't even come close. Age, income and education level showed small, but interesting moves, and the Whites chart looked pretty much like any other. Dave ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: USA Presidential Race
On Jun 9, 2008, at 8:10 PM, Wayne Eddy wrote: - Original Message - From: jon louis mann [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Killer Bs (David Brin et al) Discussion brin-l@mccmedia.com Sent: Tuesday, June 10, 2008 10:32 AM Subject: USA Presidential Race Is the implication that voters must either vote for Obama or be bigots, iow, the only reason anyone would not vote for Obama is because he is black and they are racist? . . . ronn! :) i am voting for obama BECAUSE he is black; many more will vote for mc cain to prevent a black man from winning... I am curious why Obama is being categorised as black? Given that his father was black and his mother is white, surely he is brown, or more to the point a person or an American? If he had three grandparents that were white, would he be black, brown, gray, white or a person? In the America in which I grew up: Pittsburgh, PA in the 1960s and 70s, if you had one drop of (N-word) blood in you, you were a (N-word). Plain and simple. I am not even slightly surprised that there is plenty of that going on even today. The candidacy of a black (by that definition) for POTUS will improve the perception of blacks in the USA by a tiny, tiny little bit, but only among people who wouldn't use that definition in the first place. The _election_ of a black as POTUS might shift it a tiny bit more, but we'd be damn fools to think that people use a definition like that are thinking at all. It should be made very, very clear that I was raised in a highly racist culture, and find racism to be extremely abhorrent, even as -- or perhaps better, especially as -- I acknowledge that it lives within me. Dave ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: USA Presidential Race
On 07/06/2008, at 2:22 AM, John Garcia wrote: Now that it looks like it's McCain vs. Obama (listed in alphabetical order) I was wondering what you all think of this matchup. I'm especially interested in what our friends from outside of the USA think. Young dynamic world-travelled senator with a background in constitutional law vs old guy who'll carry on in much the same vein as the current lot: Should be a no-brainer. However: Obama's viewed as a nigger, elitist, soft, too young and a Muslim variously by chunks of voting Americans and it may be that the Republicans can throw enough mud to keep Obama out. Would be a shame, as he's by far the better of the two for America's position in the rest of the world. But I won't be surprised with another 4 years of Republicans in power. I'll be celebrating hard if Obama wins. Charlie. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: USA Presidential Race
On 7 Jun 2008, at 06:41, Ronn! Blankenship wrote: At 10:42 PM Friday 6/6/2008, Wayne Eddy wrote: I would have thought that Obama Clinton sniping at other over the past months will make it harder for the Democrats to win, but I can't believe that the American public will vote the Republicans back in after all the lives lost in an unnecessary war. There are still some who do not see it as unnecessary. There are many who believe in the Rapture too. Crazies Maru -- William T Goodall Mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED] Web : http://www.wtgab.demon.co.uk Blog : http://radio.weblogs.com/0111221/ Debunking bullshit is a thankless task. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
USA Presidential Race
Now that it looks like it's McCain vs. Obama (listed in alphabetical order) I was wondering what you all think of this matchup. I'm especially interested in what our friends from outside of the USA think. john ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: USA Presidential Race
John Garcia wrote: Now that it looks like it's McCain vs. Obama (listed in alphabetical order) I was wondering what you all think of this matchup. I'm especially interested in what our friends from outside of the USA think. Here in Brazil it seems that McCain will easily win, and that Obama is like a fringe candidate, just there to prove that Dems aren't racist bigots (and Hillary was there just to prove the non-sexism). Alberto Monteiro ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: USA Presidential Race
Hi John, Here in Australia most people are rather bemused by how drawn out the nomination process is, and wonder if it wouldn't be simpler to hold all the primaries on a single weekend and get it over and done with. I think the majority of the Australian public would prefer it if Obama is the next president, as the Republicans are seen as unnecessarily belicose. I would have thought that Obama Clinton sniping at other over the past months will make it harder for the Democrats to win, but I can't believe that the American public will vote the Republicans back in after all the lives lost in an unnecessary war. Regards, Wayne Eddy. Now that it looks like it's McCain vs. Obama (listed in alphabetical order) I was wondering what you all think of this matchup. I'm especially interested in what our friends from outside of the USA think. john ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: USA Presidential Race
At 10:42 PM Friday 6/6/2008, Wayne Eddy wrote: Hi John, Here in Australia most people are rather bemused by how drawn out the nomination process is, and wonder if it wouldn't be simpler to hold all the primaries on a single weekend and get it over and done with. I think the majority of the Australian public would prefer it if Obama is the next president, as the Republicans are seen as unnecessarily belicose. I would have thought that Obama Clinton sniping at other over the past months will make it harder for the Democrats to win, but I can't believe that the American public will vote the Republicans back in after all the lives lost in an unnecessary war. There are still some who do not see it as unnecessary. . . . ronn! :) ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
