McCain's Black Relatives

[DaemonSeid]

Originally Posted by KSigkid

Thanks for the links the articles are pretty interesting.

As a general matter, does it matter if a candidate's ancestors owned slaves? I mean, for me, as a white male living in New England, it doesn't really matter much, but I'm not exactly qualified to speak for others.

Most whites don't like talking about slavery...because why should they be held accountable for what their ancestors did?

[MysticCat]

Originally Posted by PM_Mama00

Didn't most white families who lived in America own slaves at some point?

No. While it might be true that most white Americans today whose ancestors came here long enough ago could find at least one slave-owning ancestor in his or her family tree, most white families did not own slaves.

To give one snapshot: According to the 1860 Census, about 25% percent of families in the 15 states where slavery was legal owned slaves. (Meaning about 75% of families in those states did not own slaves.) Per that same census, this translated into about 8% of all white American families owning slaves.

Or why DID Obama change his name from Barry to Barack if he is not Muslim or ever was....

He didn't change his name; his name has always been Barack, just like his father for whom he is named. Barry was a nickname -- it's no different from the kid Tommy deciding to be the adult Thomas (or Tomás).

[KSig RC]

Originally Posted by DaemonSeid

Most whites don't like talking about slavery...because why should they be held accountable for what their ancestors did?

Well, this is actually an entirely different thread, and doesn't really address ksig's point at all (should we care of McCain's distant family owned slaves? Why or why not?) . . . Although you might have been joking, in which case, as always, I'm an idiot.

[DaemonSeid]

Originally Posted by KSig RC

Well, this is actually an entirely different thread, and doesn't really address ksig's point at all (should we care of McCain's distant family owned slaves? Why or why not?) . . . Although you might have been joking, in which case, as always, I'm an idiot.

actually, I was being sarcastic...and this thread is actually a Thread to Nowhere

[KSig RC]

Originally Posted by DaemonSeid

actually, I was being sarcastic...and this thread is actually a Thread to Nowhere

Then I'm completely on your side here, DS

[Phrozen1ne]

Originally Posted by Kevin

Has anyone checked whether or not Obama's family owned slaves?

They probably did. Sooooooooo what's your point?

[Phrozen1ne]

Originally Posted by DaemonSeid

actually right about now...this whole thread is pointless.




Same reason why James Earl Carter is Jimmy and Richard Cheyney is a Dick.

LOL

[PM_Mama00]

Originally Posted by MysticCat

No. While it might be true that most white Americans today whose ancestors came here long enough ago could find at least one slave-owning ancestor in his or her family tree, most white families did not own slaves.

To give one snapshot: According to the 1860 Census, about 25% percent of families in the 15 states where slavery was legal owned slaves. (Meaning about 75% of families in those states did not own slaves.) Per that same census, this translated into about 8% of all white American families owning slaves.
He didn't change his name; his name has always been Barack, just like his father for whom he is named. Barry was a nickname -- it's no different from the kid Tommy deciding to be the adult Thomas (or Tomás).

Thank you. I did not know that.

Originally Posted by DaemonSeid

Most whites don't like talking about slavery...because why should they be held accountable for what their ancestors did?

Because my ancestors were poor and lived in Sicily, therefore more than likely did not own slaves. They did their own dirty work. So no, most whites shouldn't have to be held accountable for what their ancestors did, because alot of them didn't own slaves!

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by Phrozen1ne

They probably did. Sooooooooo what's your point?

That this whole line of questioning/thinking is beyond pointless.

[Phrozen1ne]

Originally Posted by Kevin

That this whole line of questioning/thinking is beyond pointless.

Then, why comment? That seems pointless too.

[Phrozen1ne]

Forget a census, that fact that any person owned slaves ,whether the owners were black or white is disgusting.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by Phrozen1ne

Then, why comment? That seems pointless too.

I can't comment because I find the entire concept of the thread to be ridiculous?

It is just as relevant as to whether McCain's family owned slaves 150 years ago as it is whether Obama's ancestors owned slaves or participated in the slave trade.

[KSig RC]

Originally Posted by Phrozen1ne

Forget a census, that fact that any person owned slaves ,whether the owners were black or white is disgusting.

You're right.

This is still a false dilemma (in reference to this thread).

[DaemonSeid]

Originally Posted by Kevin

I can't comment because I find the entire concept of the thread to be ridiculous?

It is just as relevant as to whether McCain's family owned slaves 150 years ago as it is whether Obama's ancestors owned slaves or participated in the slave trade.

pssst.....check back at post 14....get the picture and move on.

[Phrozen1ne]

Originally Posted by Kevin

I can't comment because I find the entire concept of the thread to be ridiculous?

It is just as relevant as to whether McCain's family owned slaves 150 years ago as it is whether Obama's ancestors owned slaves or participated in the slave trade.

Your welcome to comment because this is a free country and you have rights, or so they say. If you think that this is pointless, why waste time stating such. As for the slave topic please refer to post 26, thanks.