Thank you C-SPAN!
Thank you C-SPAN for rebroadcasting the DNC meeting on 25 August 2007 in which the party set forth the rules which govern the current Democratic campaign. Thanks for letting us the voters see who said what and when they said it.
Week of May 25, 2008 - May 31, 2008
Bubba is mad: Are you on his enemies list?
Did you send money to MoveOn.org? Did you sign an online petition to the Super-delegates? Bill Clinton is making a list and he is checking it twice to find out who was naughty and who wasn't nice to his spouse; he says she was pushed aside from the Democratic nomination by organizations like Move.On who floated an online petition to Super-delegates in this process. Is your name on this petition?
Seriously, I believe organizing online petitions like the one which supported him during his Impeachment is the highest form of democracy. We the people have the right to organize and petition our government where we see fit. The superdelegates are government officials right?
How dare the citizenry of the United States take their role seriously in our democracy.
Seriously, I believe organizing online petitions like the one which supported him during his Impeachment is the highest form of democracy. We the people have the right to organize and petition our government where we see fit. The superdelegates are government officials right?
How dare the citizenry of the United States take their role seriously in our democracy.
Advertisement
"Mixed up on Gay Marriage"
Casey Lartigue Jr. on TheRoot writes, "black people, better than most, should understand the importance of being able to choose who to love and who to marry."
Mr. Lartigue Jr. introduces " Clark Hamilton, a 20 year old sentenced three years in penitentiary for marrying a Florence Hammond, a white woman. He, according to Mr. Lartigue Jr., left Virginia for Maryland after serving 82 days in jail in which time his marriage was void and null. Cases like this one are the foundation from which the Loving case was built.
Certainly, the Loving and Hammond cases have a deeper and more profound origin. As I re-read Joshua Rothman's Notorious in the Neighborhood, I understand that depth and profundity. Rothman's book is a social, cultural and economical look at the illegality of those relationships, kinships and common law marriages that straddle and fall across the color line. He bases his book on his study of records residing mostly at the University of Virginia, State Library of Virginia in Richmond and courthouse records in Charlottesville. I had the opportunity see some of these records at all three places. It is astounding that so much history is so overlooked in this country in the name of racsim.
To understand Notorious in the Neighborhood, it only takes a glimpse at the hotly discussed extra legal relationship of Thomas Jefferson and Sally Hemings. He takes a look at this episode but does his very best not to past judgment on Jefferson. He instead looks at, places the affair in context of relationships that straddled the moral or race codes of the era. I think it seems that a fair number of chancery books, order books, wills, deeds and other legal documents confirm that "illicit" relationships, as Mr. Rothman calls them, were more common than previously acknowledged in American history. These relationship crossed social, economic, gender and "racial" lines alike.
Rothman delves deep into the extra legal relationship and or common law marriage of one Daniel Isaacs and Nancy West of Charlottesville. According to Mr. Rothman Daniel Isaacs was a Jewish immigrant from Germany. He came to these shores around 1790. He was successful business person in Albemarle and the surrounding counties; he even accounts with Thomas Jefferson according to Mr. Rothman. He also had a relationship with Nancy West, a person of color which by local and state standards was illegal. Nancy West was the daugther of a white man and free person of color. Nevertheless, Nancy and David carried on their relationship despite the Virginia statues which insisted that races stay away from co-mingling.
Nancy West and David Isaacs had to go to court to fight a suit brought on by local white merchants. According to Rothman, this case was brought about because of economic jealousies and was heard in Richmond. It was a rather convoluted case insofar as whether to charge them with an illegal common law marriage--they had children--or charge them with an having "illicit relations" outside a marriage. One of the strangest aspects of Nancy and David's relationship is that they didn't and couldn't live together just because of the laws in Virginia. I guess Virginia couldn't have both ways?
Furthermore, Mr. Lartigue Jr. quotes Earl Ofari Hutchinson
Mr. Lartigue Jr. introduces " Clark Hamilton, a 20 year old sentenced three years in penitentiary for marrying a Florence Hammond, a white woman. He, according to Mr. Lartigue Jr., left Virginia for Maryland after serving 82 days in jail in which time his marriage was void and null. Cases like this one are the foundation from which the Loving case was built.
Certainly, the Loving and Hammond cases have a deeper and more profound origin. As I re-read Joshua Rothman's Notorious in the Neighborhood, I understand that depth and profundity. Rothman's book is a social, cultural and economical look at the illegality of those relationships, kinships and common law marriages that straddle and fall across the color line. He bases his book on his study of records residing mostly at the University of Virginia, State Library of Virginia in Richmond and courthouse records in Charlottesville. I had the opportunity see some of these records at all three places. It is astounding that so much history is so overlooked in this country in the name of racsim.
To understand Notorious in the Neighborhood, it only takes a glimpse at the hotly discussed extra legal relationship of Thomas Jefferson and Sally Hemings. He takes a look at this episode but does his very best not to past judgment on Jefferson. He instead looks at, places the affair in context of relationships that straddled the moral or race codes of the era. I think it seems that a fair number of chancery books, order books, wills, deeds and other legal documents confirm that "illicit" relationships, as Mr. Rothman calls them, were more common than previously acknowledged in American history. These relationship crossed social, economic, gender and "racial" lines alike.
Rothman delves deep into the extra legal relationship and or common law marriage of one Daniel Isaacs and Nancy West of Charlottesville. According to Mr. Rothman Daniel Isaacs was a Jewish immigrant from Germany. He came to these shores around 1790. He was successful business person in Albemarle and the surrounding counties; he even accounts with Thomas Jefferson according to Mr. Rothman. He also had a relationship with Nancy West, a person of color which by local and state standards was illegal. Nancy West was the daugther of a white man and free person of color. Nevertheless, Nancy and David carried on their relationship despite the Virginia statues which insisted that races stay away from co-mingling.
Nancy West and David Isaacs had to go to court to fight a suit brought on by local white merchants. According to Rothman, this case was brought about because of economic jealousies and was heard in Richmond. It was a rather convoluted case insofar as whether to charge them with an illegal common law marriage--they had children--or charge them with an having "illicit relations" outside a marriage. One of the strangest aspects of Nancy and David's relationship is that they didn't and couldn't live together just because of the laws in Virginia. I guess Virginia couldn't have both ways?
Furthermore, Mr. Lartigue Jr. quotes Earl Ofari Hutchinson
.. many blacks "seethe" at the comparison. As the argument goes, interracial marriage should not be compared to gay marriage because of the oppression blacks have suffered. Hutchinson dismisses that as being "self-serving." It is also myopic, a case of a former slave putting on his former master's clothing and wanting others to be treated as slaves.
