Hatewatch Tweets
Hatewatch is managed by the staff of the Intelligence Report, an investigative magazine published by the Alabama-based civil rights group Southern Poverty Law Center.
Alaska Birther Launches ‘Sovereign’ Attack on ‘Mulatto’ Obama
An Alaska man who is challenging President Barack Obama’s eligibility for office on the grounds that the president is a “mulatto” based his complaint on an argument common to the neo-Confederate and antigovernment “sovereign citizen” movements, Hatewatch has learned.
In a complaint filed Tuesday with the Alaska Division of Elections, Gordon Warren Epperly of Juneau argued that Obama isn’t eligible for office because, as a person of mixed-race descent, he is not a “natural-born citizen” of the United States.
“As Barack Hussein Obama II is of the ‘Mulatto’ race, his status of citizenship is founded upon the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. Before the (purported) ratification of the Fourteenth Amendment, the race of ‘Negro’ or ‘Mulatto’ had no standing to be citizens of the United States under the United States Constitution,” the complaint says. “As the Fourteenth Amendment is only a grant of ‘Civil Rights’ and not a grant of ‘Political Rights,’ Barack Hussein Obama II does not have any ‘Political Rights’ under any provision of the United States Constitution to hold any Public Office of the United States government.”
Though this appears to be the first time it has been used in an effort to challenge Obama’s citizenship status, Epperly’s argument is not unique. Indeed, it seems to be an amalgam of two bizarre extremist legal theories — one that says that blacks do not have the same legal rights as whites because their citizenship is founded on the 14th Amendment, and another that claims that in order to be a “natural-born” U.S. citizen, one’s parents must both be U.S. citizens as well.
The latter theory most recently made its appearance in a Georgia court, where attorneys Mark Hatfield and Van Irion argued unsuccessfully that since the president’s father was never a U.S. citizen, Obama not a natural-born citizen and is constitutionally ineligible for political office. Van Irion is affiliated with the Southern Legal Resource Center, a neo-Confederate outfit co-founded by white supremacist attorney Kirk Lyons, who was married at the Aryan Nations compound in a ceremony officiated by the late Aryan Nations leader and Christian Identity preacher Richard Butler.
The 14th Amendment component of Epperly’s challenge stems from an idea promulgated by the Posse Comitatus, a racist and anti-Semitic group that roiled the Midwest in the 1970s and 1980s and believed that the county sheriff is the highest legitimate law enforcement authority. Posse ideologues argued, in effect, that God gave America to the white man and therefore the government cannot abridge most rights of whites unless they submit to a “contract” with that government. Black people were only made citizens by the 14th Amendment, they argued, meaning that they have permanently contracted with the government and therefore must obey all its dictates. Or, put another way, black people were truly second-class citizens, forced to obey government and tax laws that, the Posse argued, don’t apply to white sovereign citizens (the Posse often called them “organic citizens”).
Epperly appears to have been comingling sovereign and neo-Confederate ideology some time. In 2006, he sued Congress for unconstitutionally enacting the Reconstruction Acts of 1867, which, he alleged, placed him “in a state of involuntary servitude” and made him “liable for the debt of the United States.”
The Reconstruction Acts, enacted in the wake of the Civil War, placed the former Confederate States under military rule, and required them to draft new constitutions and ratify the 14th Amendment. Some neo-Confederate sympathizers argue that the 14th Amendment was not properly ratified because its ratification involved strong-arm tactics. Sovereign ideology – a form of which has recently been embraced by the neo-Confederate League of the South – says whites can reject the 14th Amendment and proclaim themselves independent, free from what they perceive as an overweening and downright criminal federal government.
The modern-day sovereign citizen movement, whose adherents believe they are exempt from most laws and are often confrontational with police officers, is a direct descendant of Posse Comitatus. Most modern sovereigns, however, seem unaware of the movement’s racist origins – and in recent years a permutation of sovereign ideology has gained traction among blacks.
Amazingly enough, this is not the first time Epperly has challenged the eligibility of an elected official he does not like. In a 2010 letter to the Alaska director of elections, he declared that Lisa Murkowski, who had just been elected senator, was not qualified for office “as she is not a citizen of the United States under Article I of the Constitution for the United States.”
His argument stemmed from a 22-page “Proclamation,” apparently researched solely by Epperly, which supposedly proves that female and non-white elected officials are “usurpers of office” who “have no political privileges to hold public offices of the United States under the qualification clauses of Article I, Article, II, and Article III of the United States Constitution.”
In the same proclamation, Epperly concluded also that Obama is a “usurper,” and that the president, Murkowski and all other non-whites and women who hold government office were “inserted” into their positions by seditious “domestic enemies” intent on infiltrating and destroying the United States under cover of “political correctness.”
Epperly ends with a barely veiled threat. Demanding that Congress and the Supreme Court “come forward and give answers to the allegations of sedition as stated herein,” he wrote: “If those who are participating in the sedition of the Constitution of the United States of America do not remove themselves from public office, the people will have no choice but to remove those individuals from office by what ever means it may take.”
on February 24th, 2012 at 5:10 pm
This case is pathetically laughable. It’s got no legal basis whatsoever. Per usual, this case will get shot down faster than a depleted balloon.
on February 24th, 2012 at 5:43 pm
The 14th amendment is not legitimate. Please hear me out. The rules are that in order to pass an amendment two-thirds of the House and Senate approve of the proposal and send it to the states for a vote. Then, three-fourths of the states must affirm the proposed Amendment.
But! After the Civil War, Congress set up puppet legislatures in the occupied Southern States. These representatives were not elected by the people of those states. Do you remember from your history books how Blacks filled the legislatures of Southern states during Reconstruction? How can that be? Well, Congress passed a law making it illegal for combatants who fought against the Federal government to vote. This was literally all White men of the South. Thus White men couldn’t vote. Also remember that women were not allowed to vote until the 1920′s. Thus White women couldn’t vote.
The 13th, 14th, and 15th amendments were not passed according to the rules of the Constitution. Because many states were occupied by Federal troops and the legislatures were gerrymandered puppet legislatures, thus skewing the requirement of 3/4 state legislatures passing a new constitutional amendment.
Thus I contend that Blacks are not citizens. The Dread Scott decision of the Supreme Court still stands.
on February 24th, 2012 at 5:51 pm
I had the same thought on reading his complaint; a little googling confirmed it. Aside from his own website (http://www.usa-the-republic.com/), he’s written a lot of stuff that’s linked or referred to on other sov citizen websites.
on February 24th, 2012 at 5:56 pm
“Mulatto”? I have not heard that appelation used, outside of certain historical contexts, since 1972 or so. Nonetheless, even without a 14th amendment, or a 13th, or the Civil War, his reasoning is wrong. Under the Slave Codes and the precedents from Roman law that informed them, the status of a child born to mixed race or mixed status parents followed that of the mother.
This man needs an optorectomy: a surgical detachment of his optic nerves from where he has stuck his head, so he gets a better outlook on life.
on February 24th, 2012 at 7:03 pm
Te sad this is, while the courts will shoot this down, the ones who believe it this pile of dung will only say it “proves” a government conspiracy to include the “usurpers” and the “included”.
I think there is a case to be made to following these idiots up to make sure that their profane and seditious speech (protected) does not turn into violent action (not protected).
For as one wag put it: The constitution allows you to speak like a fool; it does not allow you to act like one!
on February 24th, 2012 at 8:41 pm
These tools really like wasting money on legal actions that are guarateed to fail before they even get heard.
on February 24th, 2012 at 9:31 pm
This Epperly guy is a paranoid, delusional, lunatic! But than again, ALL White supremacists are like that.
on February 25th, 2012 at 12:48 am
On 11 June 2011, the birther blog “The Post and eMail” posted a Declaration of Soveriegnty”by Gordon Epperly
http://www.thepostemail.com/20.....vereignty/
“It has come to the attention of the People of the Alaska Republic that if the Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court refuses to rescind the unlawful “Oath of Office” that was given to Barack Obama Jr., the duty to protect the U.S. Constitution would fall upon the Military of the United States.”
There’s also a birther by the name of Paul Guthrie, aka “Jedi Pauly” who cites Gordon Epperly quite often as part of his theory that citizenship only passes from the father, never the mother.
on February 25th, 2012 at 4:27 am
Is Mr. Epperly born of the family who were in America at the time of the ratification of the Constitution? If not, I say he has no standing to sue since he’s not a citizen of the TRUE founders of the country, only an immigrant.
My claim, of course, has as much legal standing as his case against Obama and Murkowski.
on February 25th, 2012 at 1:29 pm
How do we know such isn’t exactly in the same vein as “self-determination” such as the Communists were known to advance in the day (as in implying that “oppressed” ethnic, racial and religious “National Minorities” had the “natural right” to establish a sovereign homeland)?
on February 25th, 2012 at 2:10 pm
Willfully ignorant and delusional. In other words, Epperly sounds like half of Ron Paul’s supporters and most of the GOP base.
on February 25th, 2012 at 6:33 pm
These sovereigns would be laughable if they weren’t so dangerous. And of course they’re birthers too.
Latest birther argument: Obama isn’t a natural born US citizen because his father wasn’t born in the US.
They just don’t quit, do they.
on February 26th, 2012 at 4:25 pm
Jason Smith: America’s single most prominent authority on Constitutional law.
I really do wish there was some way to block people for spam. Because that’s really all that Joachim Schmidt really is. ‘Human’ spam.
on February 26th, 2012 at 11:08 pm
Jason,
First, why would we hear you out on anything at this point? You are comically irrelevant and persistently idiotic.
Second, it is Dred Scott. If you can’t get that right then why would we use your expertise on Constitutional law?
on February 27th, 2012 at 1:34 am
@Jason. Sources please. Even if there was a law saying those who fought against the Federal government couldn’t vote, it’s not like the Feds had investigators who would find your CSA “uniform” or military ID card.
You’re a riot.
on February 27th, 2012 at 4:17 am
OK, Jason Smith. We heard you out. Guess what, you’re still wrong. Simply put, your heroes of the Civil War, those white southerners who fought on the side of the Confederates committed treason in the most literal sense possible — by waging war against the United States. It’s right there in Article III, Section 3. That section says Congress can decide what punishment should be applied, and they chose to take away their right to vote. (Like felons).
So, guess what, you’re wrong. The rules of the Constitution were still followed, the 13th, 14th and 15th Amendments are valid, and black people are citizens of the United States. Good night, and good luck.
on February 27th, 2012 at 7:52 am
I am now not certain if Jason Smith is a committee, a Poe, or a committee of Poes. He has hit every high point of cretinism it is possible to hit. Well, maybe not *every*. It’s difficult for people of ordinary intelligence to predict where cretinous “logic” will proceed next.
on February 27th, 2012 at 8:20 am
given Epperly’s claim that women are not citizens and cannot hold public office, my question is did he also file a challenge against Sarah Palin?
on February 27th, 2012 at 8:42 am
Just to keep the record straight ….
Jason wrote: “Congress passed a law making it illegal for combatants who fought against the Federal government to vote. This was literally all White men of the South.”
This statement is literally a big fat lie. Obviously, some white Southern men did not take up arms against the legitimate government of the United States. In fact, as is very well known, some Southern men (known as Loyalists) fought FOR the legitimate government and against the false, treasonous so-called Confederacy.
on February 27th, 2012 at 8:42 am
We all contend, Jason, that you’re a damn fool and you still know nothing about anything. You can also say you’re not a citizen yourself, but I know you won’t. Idiot.
on February 27th, 2012 at 9:14 am
Good point Erika, that is precisely why his case is laughable. That Epperly guy is a real hoot.
on February 27th, 2012 at 9:53 am
Shadow Wolf, no the claim is laughable because it is “wholly without merit legally and factually” to cite Judge Dennis Chin in the Fox News v. Franken case.
on February 27th, 2012 at 9:54 am
that he apparently didn’t go after Sarah Palin just proves the guy is a hypocrite
on February 27th, 2012 at 10:32 am
Can we stop all of this nonsense? Obama will be re-elected. Get use to it!
on February 27th, 2012 at 11:59 am
to jason smith….can we also contend that you are also ineligible to vote….on the grounds that you are braindead.
on February 27th, 2012 at 12:34 pm
There have been a number of retorts against me on this thread and I wish to reply. I urge all of you to buy the book, “Erectus Walks Amongst Us”, available here at Amazon.com http://www.amazon.com/Erectus-.....038;sr=8-2
It is my bible. The book argues that Blacks are a separate species and are less evolved than Whites. They are as far from us genetically as modern humans are from Homo Erectus. It is my goal to transform America into a nation where the fundamentals of this book are incorporated into law.
You can read the book online for free at this link. I understand you may not have the time to read the whole thing, but please take the time to at least skim through it. I guarantee it will change your life: http://www.erectuswalksamongst.us
Regards,
- Jason
on February 27th, 2012 at 1:02 pm
Jason,
No wonder you’re so confused about reality. Here you are, touting a book on anthropology by a longtime “anarcho-capitalist” “libertarian anarchist” patent attorney. Would you look for legal advice from a paleontologist? Try reading something written by an actual qualified author for a change, and you might actually encounter a fact or two.
on February 27th, 2012 at 1:08 pm
Jason,
It wouldn’t surprise me that such shoddy ‘scholarship’ is considered your bible. I would only as you this: spend more time reading your ‘bible,’ and less time bothering us ‘functional human beings.’
on February 27th, 2012 at 2:11 pm
Poor Jason. I thought you might have exhausted your logical facilities, but no: you have exsartaginated upon them. Your dysperspicuity as a lawyer is exceeded by your oligophrenia as a physical anthropologist. If you think *that*, you probably believe in Piltdown Man and his ancestor, the Cardiff Giant. ¡Pobre de ti, bobito!
on February 27th, 2012 at 3:05 pm
“Jason Smith said,
on February 24th, 2012 at 5:43 pm
The 14th amendment is not legitimate. Please hear me out. The rules are that in order to pass an amendment two-thirds of the House and Senate approve of the proposal and send it to the states for a vote. Then, three-fourths of the states must affirm the proposed Amendment.”
~Ok, so after ‘hearing you out’, I can honestly say since the amendment has been signed, sealed and voted upon right there in the document for us all to see that you are totally illegitimate in your claim; about as revelatory as saying there’s water at the bottom of the ocean! Of course as we continue ‘forgetting’, anything that states ‘equality’ or ‘social justice’ by default means ‘anti-white’, since they are apparently the cream of creation under God’s Law (though they can never find a verse to confirm it).
“But! After the Civil War, Congress set up puppet legislatures in the occupied Southern States.”
~Except of course, they didn’t because though the North won, both U.S. regions were in economic shambles and needed exponential mutual support in resources and the federal government just to continue existing, period. Again, your entitled to your own (pro-White) opinions, but facts and reality have a colorblind, liberal bias I’m glad to say…
“These representatives were not elected by the people of those states.”
~There, again, have never any U.S. representatives that haven’t been elected by their respective public at large since our initiation. Whether or not they’re elected fairly or honestly (i.e. Bush VS. Gore 2000 and every major political contest since the Citizens UNITED ruling) is of course, another debate entirely…
“Do you remember from your history books how Blacks filled the legislatures of Southern states during Reconstruction?”
~Read quite a few history textbooks and as many if not more classes on it and I can honestly say I never remember that ever happening; Since you’ve provided no resources or scholarly citations of this, I’m going to assume the previous question was inquired under the influence of LSD or some other illegal substance that has disproportionately affected minority male populations versus their European Caucasian counterparts (hmmm….http://www.huffingtonpost.com/.....17105.html & http://www.huffingtonpost.com/.....20723.html)
“How can that be?”
~Because it never was? The voices in our head may not be real, but they do make some on spot points time to time…
“Well, Congress passed a law making it illegal for combatants who fought against the Federal government to vote.”
~Which is why we had Jim Crow, the Ku Klux Klan, de facto segregation in every aspect of life, public lynchings for more than century AFTER the Civil War. Its almost like everybody completely forgot why we fought it in the first place (‘states’ rights and not slavery, eh?)
“This was literally all White men of the South. Thus White men couldn’t vote. Also remember that women were not allowed to vote until the 1920’s. Thus White women couldn’t vote.”
~At least the latter part is true, congratulations on at least flirting with the Ligth. Of course, as the ratification of the 19th amendment continued, we found out that ONE primary resistance for women’s suffrage was the fact they supported more liberal politics than their male counterparts (i.e. public education, health care, pacifism) such as abolitionism and intergration for those that were educated and enlightened enough to see that. You didn’t REALLY think that all those alleged rapes of white women on the part of colored men by Eurocentrists (i.e. supremacists) were true, did you now?
“The 13th, 14th, and 15th amendments were not passed according to the rules of the Constitution.”
~No sir. Rich-er, old-er, and primarily Christian white males have always been the status quo electoral college demographic, right from the Founding Fathers thorugh the rise of Obama. Just recall that 3/5′s clause, the Southern Strategy and the Tea Party’s ‘pro-american’ initiatives (about 70-75 of it as a matter of fact). Guess we can’t expect them to actually be the creators and maintainers of all the world’s greatness and civilization along be responsible for all its problems and misgivings as well, huh? That’s what those sub-human minorities, femi-nazis and darned Mooslims and liberuhls are for!
“Because many states were occupied by Federal troops and the legislatures were gerrymandered puppet legislatures, thus skewing the requirement of 3/4 state legislatures passing a new constitutional amendment”.
~Unless of course we recall that particular Constitutional statute that forbade the former and the latter; sure your not talking about Egypt or the Middle East as of late with this blather?
“Thus I contend that Blacks are not citizens.”
~Thus I contend that white people should’ve never brought over dark-colored people to do all the labor they were too lazy and incompetent to do themselves. That way, both races stay seperate and happy, what ‘white’ people always ‘wanted’; we know all non-white people are equal citizens, just not as ‘equal’ as the white overlords! (I think I said that right)…
“The Dread Scott decision of the Supreme Court still stands.”
~Yeah, if we pretend that the collective history and continuance of time didn’t elapse between then and now. Quick question: If white people are already the cream of the crop and the greatest at everything, why do they keep having to edit and re-arrange it as if it isn’t just perfect the way it is? You guys are trying just a little too hard for comfort, you know…
on February 27th, 2012 at 4:30 pm
Jason Smith’s comedic value is wearing a little thin… He’s still hilarious in his idiocy, but it’s reached the point where I’m no longer in tears of laughter when I read his posts. This board is moderated, right? He’s pretty much a troll… So why isn’t he like… banned or something now? As for the article itself… um… yeah, I don’t have anything more productive to state than that birthers and sovereigns are completely nutso and should be watched for the safety of the rest of sane society….
on February 27th, 2012 at 5:39 pm
“Erectus walks among us” isn’t fit to be printed out and used to line bird cages. It seems to follow the general right wing ‘singularity’ strategy of just putting ridiculous nonsense all into one little package and when people can’t find the time to debunk every single line of it, then it MUST be true.
There is no genetic data from homo erectus on the chromosomes, so a lot of that is just guessing. But since blacks can reproduce with people from other races just fine, I’m guessing the ‘separate species’ thing gets a hole in it already.
“They are as far from us genetically as modern humans are from Homo Erectus.”
No, no they aren’t. Just no. The closest thing to this is that neanderthals may have contributed 4% to non-African genomes. Denisova has contributed as much as 6% to the genome of people in Melanesia, yet there is no book saying they are a separate species. Weird.
“It is my goal to transform America into a nation where the fundamentals of this book are incorporated into law.”
I skimmed through that last section of the ‘book’ about policy. The only way the things contained in there would happen is if America became a totalitarian nation so extreme that would make people living under Stalin glad they had him instead.
on February 27th, 2012 at 6:11 pm
Would all of you stop hating on Jason?
He is wrong, but he is still a person with a right to his views. Telling him he is wrong is good (some people do that), but hurling abuse at him isn’t helpful, either to him or to the progressive movement.
Jason: I want to tell you this calmly, but firmly. You are being deceived by the people you are using as your sources. Your social, legal, and political views are profoundly flawed. The books you are apparently reading are written by cranks and charlatans. I urge you to look elsewhere for information and inspiration.
on February 27th, 2012 at 9:49 pm
Dan,
The mistake you’ve just made is taking Joachim seriously. He’s a troll on a moderated forum. We’re allowed to ask the moderators of said forum to ban him.
on February 28th, 2012 at 8:38 am
I agree with Aron. To Mark Potok and other moderators, ban Jason Smith. It’s becoming ridiculous dealing with him.
on February 28th, 2012 at 9:32 am
To be a troll you have to maintain composure while angering your targets. Jason’s rants come off as severely butthurt and whiny, ergo he cannot rightly be called a troll. Clearly this blog trolls him, as do we, individually.
on February 28th, 2012 at 9:37 am
Ruslan,
You are, of course, completely right. I bow to your greater knowlege of Teh Lulz.
on February 28th, 2012 at 10:22 am
who wrote the book erectus among us tom metzger!…jason you say that blacks are less than human…what say you about your primitive hate…..hate is not a sustainable human characteristic it only leads to destruction and waste and yet you are all for it…you show an even more primitive and backward mentality than anyone you attack with your biased posts…..you will never stop being the erectus among us until you free your mind from your prehistoric neanderthal like mentality…..what i find amusing is that people that kicked the door down in the middle of the night and stole everything at gun point are now trying to tell other people who the rightful owners and citizens of this land are…..only the hypocritical white right!
on February 28th, 2012 at 11:21 am
I am reminded of my salad days, when my friend, Manuel, called someone like Jason a Pithecanthropus nonerectus.
on February 28th, 2012 at 11:43 am
“Erectus Walks Among Us”? Seriously? This is all about penis envy isn’t it Jason?
on February 28th, 2012 at 11:47 am
The moderators have tools at their disposal to determine if Jason, or anyone else for that matter, is posting as a single individual or as a committee. The same tools allow them to detect sock-puppetry as well. By now, even the dimmest WN should know that.
Annoying as he may be, Jason has been harmless. Armed only with tired old talking points, discredited data and a dull wit, he lays bare the lie that a white skin bestows intellectual superiority. Jason is an attention whore and, at this point, a successful one since he, rather than Epperly, is the topic of conversation.
Finally, a shout out to the moderators. They read vile shit so that we don’t have to.
on February 28th, 2012 at 1:36 pm
True, Gregory: I’d hate to see the electronic maggots in their garbage can. Still, if the committee calling themselves Jason Smith are operating from the same address, the only evidence of that would be forensic linguistics. I have never qualified as a forensic linguist, but style, structure, and tone are all uneven enough to make me suspect hat if he isn’t several people, he at least thinks he is.
on February 28th, 2012 at 9:48 pm
What does it matter if Jason is one idiot or a team of idiots? It’s just too easy to smack this character down.
on February 29th, 2012 at 8:39 am
There is one very reliable and very non-scientific way of telling if two living creatures are humans: they can procreate. One of my neighbors is a married (I’m assuming they’re married) interracial couple. The man is black and the woman is white. They have a son and a daughter. I guess that means the black man is a human. You’re right, Ruslan, smacking down Jason is too easy.
on February 29th, 2012 at 10:26 am
“ONE of my neighbors is a married…interracial couple.” Wow! A case of multiracial multiple personalities! :-)
on February 29th, 2012 at 11:26 am
“If those who are participating in the sedition of the Constitution of the United States of America do not remove themselves from public office, the people will have no choice but to remove those individuals from office by what ever means it may take.”
Very well. As one of the people, I say that we should start with those politicians who have curried the favor of people like Epperly…by voting them out of office in the next election.
on March 1st, 2012 at 10:25 am
There is a downside to closing mental institutions. Some of the Obama haters prove it.
on March 1st, 2012 at 11:05 am
Do these people even realize his first is almost at it’s conclusion? It didn’t work folks, now shut up and sit down.
on March 1st, 2012 at 1:44 pm
Tyrone,
Oh, and I’m sure His Serene Highness Prince Ron Paul’s the solution, eh? Get a life, silly person.
on March 1st, 2012 at 2:01 pm
Since Alaska was not part of the United States in 1789 when the Constitution went into affect is Gordon Warren Epperly a natural born citizen? That argument makes as much sense as his argument about the President. We can drive ourselves crazy with this type of talk.
on March 1st, 2012 at 4:12 pm
WHY, oh WHY, doesn’t someone just make sure Gordon Warren Epperly never reproduces!!!!!! The same strategy might be perpetrated on Jason Smith – benefits to the whole USA.
on March 1st, 2012 at 8:26 pm
“Erectus Walks Among Us” Really?
If I saw that on a bookshelf I would so pick it up, thinking it was some really funny gay porn.
But in reality its just a tome about a guy with homophobia.
Oh its not that? Wait…what? Its a compendium of tomes from old KKK literature, written as typical for someone with 3rd grade thinking skills.
Carry on.
on March 1st, 2012 at 8:27 pm
As for Epperly, it is really a shame that medication to inhibit or reduce paranoid delusion requires that the patient be lucid enough to imbibe in it.
on March 1st, 2012 at 9:27 pm
the issues raised are worthless, because the race thing didn’t matter re citizenship in non slave states, did it? and Obama wasn’t born in a state that had declared for slavery.
The 14th amendment non legitimacy thing is stupid anyway, because the south had declared itself a separate nation and had to conform to some issues before it could be treated as not conquered enemy but part of the USA again.
Also, the points made very clear in the 14th are mostly present less obviously but easily treatable that way in Article 6 and elsewhere but the Supreme Court was dominated by southerners all those days, so of course whatever could have been used against slavery and so forth was not used. The little time bombs were defused and had to be restated in clear terms.
even so, the fact that a slave counted for either 1/3 or 2/3 I forget which of a white in calculating population for representation, it meant they were still a kind of citizen since they were being represented.
on March 2nd, 2012 at 9:19 am
Kate, that was hilarious. It really would be nice if ‘[Homo*] Erectus Walks Among Us’ really WAS gay erotica. Then it would very likely prove to be far less dangerous. Perhaps the cause for marital strife (LOL), but not terrorism. I hope.
*HA! Notice how I managed to work Homo in there? My skill at satire never ceases to amaze me. :p
on March 2nd, 2012 at 9:20 am
I’m surprised that Epperly didn’t try one of the “tax protesters” favorite crazy arguments – that the 16th Amendment is illegitimate because Ohio never legally became a state.
Incidentially, most of the White Supremacists myths about Black male sexuality started when slave owners decided that their slaves were better in bed than their wives. The White males were afraid that their wives would reach the same conclusion so naturally, the response by the White men (like Epperly) was to try to repress White women and Black males- Erectus Walks Among Us, right down to the title appesrs to be cut out of the same cloth – the White Supremacist’s hate and represession of fails to hide the inherient insecuirty and jealously behind it. The White Supremacist like Epperly and Jason Smith therefore is a pathetic creature.
on March 2nd, 2012 at 10:33 am
Erika I seriously doubt that it was anything the slave women raped by their white owners did that made them “better in bed than their wives.” More likely the sort of person who rapes a slave or anyone else gets perverse pleasure from the abusive nature of the act. Perhaps the slaves resisted more than the wives which no doubt added to the sick thrill these perverse animals derived from the rape.
on March 2nd, 2012 at 6:31 pm
Sovereigns are gonna have a hard time on election day choosing between Obama, whose father is from Kenya, and Romney, whose father is from Mexico. I guess they’ll sit this one out.
on March 3rd, 2012 at 12:21 am
“Mulatto”? I have not heard that appelation used, outside of certain historical contexts, since 1972 or so.
Actually, Reynardine, there was an excellent indie band in the 1980s called Tragic Mulatto.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tragic_Mulatto
on March 3rd, 2012 at 7:50 am
Meanwhile, back at the ranch, although all Americans were doubtless glad of Seward’s Folly during the Cold War, I’m starting to wonder how much money the Russians would demand from us to take…the damned…thing…back.
on March 5th, 2012 at 11:43 am
True, Andy, but what I said was that *I* hadn’t heard it. I wasn’t following popular music at that point; for reasons explained long ago, most of my musical exposure was then to Bollywood and Lollywood. In legal and sociological contexts, though, the only use of the word “mulatto” was then in historical contexts. E.g., “the mulatto population of Hispaniola, who were not recognized as white by the French, joined the Haitian rebellion”.
on March 5th, 2012 at 12:42 pm
Reynardine, there’s a guy named Zhirinovsky you should talk to about that.
on March 6th, 2012 at 1:14 pm
Ruslan, I’m not talking to Zhirinovsky, because:
A. My Russian is rusty.
B. Our prefessors were people of cultivation and refinement, who would never have taught us the kind of vocabulary suitable for conversations with Zhirinovsky, apart from referring us to certain lexicons needed for understanding the works of Solzhenitsyn.
C. I did once contemplate entering the psychiatric field, but it was premised on my being the one with the key.
Sorry I didn’t reply sooner, but actually, I did, and it glitched.
on March 9th, 2012 at 3:47 pm
Andy (and Reynardine),
I had always understood the term “Mulatto” to mean a person (child) who was born of one white parent and one black parent. Only when I got older did I learn the term applied to any person with one white parent and one non-white parent.
As a person of mixed-race heritage (like our President), I frequently refer to myself as “Mulatto”. People tend to understand what the term implies, and I guess that when I use that term to self-identify, it takes power away from those who intend to use it as derogatory.
Similar to the way the “N” word (which I personally detest) is used as a term of endearment used among people within the black community, but un-acceptable when used by people outside the black community.
I’m not indicting either of you, mind you. Just noticed the discussion, and decided to give the opinion of the term by someone who is of mixed-race/heritage.
on March 12th, 2012 at 3:31 pm
Geoff, you can call yourself the Duke of Aberdeen, so long as it’s your choice. Historically, it has referred to Eurafricans who were not given the legal standing of “pure” whites, and if one parent was slave and one free, the child took the status of the mother. In colonial Haiti, a “mulatto” was in fact with one parent “pure” African and one “pure” European, with many terms for various degrees of descent. After Haitian independence, it was applied to those of noticeable European background, and frequently the status of artisan or better. The animosity between “mulattos” and “blacks” has had woeful implications since.
As you are not a grand jury, you can “indict” neither me nor anyone else on this blog, and I caution you about calling anyone a n*, lest you get a smack in the mouth.
on March 13th, 2012 at 2:36 am
Reynardine,
Hold on there, pardner. I just happen to BE the Duke of Aberdeen. And if my knowledge of Scottish noble customs (derived entirely from ‘Highlander’) is correct, Geoff and I may have to fight to the death. After all, there can only be ONE!