Bush and Kerry related to Dracula

Regarding this post: So what do you think the REASON is that those from certain bloodlines stay in power? I mean, certain families tend to be political with a tradition of civil service, while other times a ruler may use his family's history to his advantage-- but it seems like the poster was insinuating some other reason, like a conspiracy of sorts, as to why people in power stay in power.

-------------------

I would first like to say that anyone who says that they can explain exactly why this is, is wrong. This is a very complicated topic. I have been researching it for a long time, and still don't know exactly what to think. Also anyone who passes it off without even having done any research in to this obviously doesn't know what they are talking about as they have no evidence.

The best way I could explain this in America (it is different in different countries) is quite simply that there is a priviallaged upper class in America. IF you look at families like the Bush family, you find they have been going to Yale for about 150 years, and the Russell family nearly 300 years. Most people don't know most of the members of these families other than a few very prominent ones. There are many who are almost unknown who set the ways for these dynasties. The reason why these families were abel to become part of the Yale , Harvard etc. crowds is becuase they are descendants of the colonial elite of America. They had the money, the land, and the connections. They even founded the colleges such as Yale and Princeton, as well as the secret societies and many of the clubs within them.

Using George Bush as an example, if you look at what his ancestors were you find they were prominet people. They are judges, bussiness men, politicians, and what not. Most of which are not well documented figures, as their power and influance was usually over a small area. However certain people get certain breaks simply because they are upper class, which they would not be if they werent descended from certain people. This allows for dynasties such as the Bush family or the Rockefellers. So it doesnt appear to be simply your blood that gets these people places, but if they didn't have that blood they would almost certainly not be where they are.

This is not to say that this is the only factor to the rise to political or corporate power, although I think it is posibly the most important. It is true that you can become powerfull without these ancestral links, but if you research the most powerfull people, as I have done, you find that the highest postions are almost always held by someone of an elite stream.

hmmm...i thought Bush was the "reptilian Anti-christ" ????
does that mean Dracula was a reptilian too?????

oh boy ... nothing like reading this stuff to help digestion ...

[edit on 1-3-2005 by BaastetNoir]

Okay , now im really lost. Bush and Kerry are NOT reltated to Vlad Tepes!!!!!!!! The little blood line thing is inacurate!

As I said earlier:

"The link to the real Dracula, as far as I know is not a blood relations (a descent) or a common link (a cousin). It appears that this "so-called" Bush and Kerry link to Dracula is that they are cousins of Prince Charles, who is a descendant of Vlad. This is called a lateral relationship, and is of no significance whatsoever. "

ahh, I see...so then Bush and Kerry are like couisons?

Yes, Bush and Kerry are cousins. 9th cousin 2 times removed is their closest connection. I am currently researching George Bush's cousins who have served in the cabinet. I have checked all the way from Washington to FDR, with a few hole to try and fill in later on. Technically speaking he should only be related to one or two people in each administration through people who immigrated to America, but he is related to around 40% of them in this range. I think the most is in the Lincoln admin. where he is related to 12 of the 16 cabinet members, and 10 through people who immigrated to America or their descendants.

So far the only administration, which are kind of what you would expect are Cleveland's 2nd term, where there were only at least 3 of 13, and Woodrow Wilson where there were 7 of 21. What shoul be noted here is that they were both Democrats. The Democrats generally have less cousins of Bush than the Republicans.

I won't go into detail on this as it is a very complicated subject.

I can give you two links though:

www.blue-blood.co.uk
This is one of my sites, I don't really have much time to do any work on it, so there isn't much on there.

members.aol.com...

This site lists relations between Bush and Kerry. I cannot vouch for his charts as I haven't checked them, but from what I see it has the same names as me. He is also quite respected.

Originally posted by hierarch
Yes, Bush and Kerry are cousins. 9th cousin 2 times removed is their closest connection. I am currently researching George Bush's cousins who have served in the cabinet.

Do you realize that by your logic you could find connections between A LOT of people, including yourself?

Sebatwerk, is that 'blue blood guilt' that you are exhibiting?

Year of elitism taking their toll?

Or do you defend every two people who are ACCUSED of being related!

Originally posted by akilles
Sebatwerk, is that 'blue blood guilt' that you are exhibiting?

Year of elitism taking their toll?

Or do you defend every two people who are ACCUSED of being related!

I'm simply saying that if you're willing to separate people's bloodlines by going up many generations and going sideways many steps then you can connect many people. Two hundred years ago, the world was a MUCH LESS populated place than it is today. All of our bloodlines started from only a few.

I'll give you an example: one of my good friends works for his dad's pool-cleaning business. It's a blue-collar family, yet their bloodline is descended from King Louis XIV(?) from France AND from an african slave from sometime before the civil war. He's an Irish redhead, by the way.

The point is that we all descended from somewhere, and chances are good that our bloodlines connect somewhere along the way.

If you don't mind me asking, what is your friends name?

Blood relations have always been of the utmost importance among the socially 'mobile', that is, those on top. Whether to maintain power, consolidate it, gain it, financial reasons, or merely because two cousins 'love' each other.

The point is, the evidence is well-documented who keeps it in the family, the Elite.

Why deny any correlation whatsoever betwen wealth, power, and the importance of family?

Originally posted by akilles
If you don't mind me asking, what is your friends name?

I will not give you my friend's name publically. Send me a PM.

Blood relations have always been of the utmost importance among the socially 'mobile', that is, those on top. Whether to maintain power, consolidate it, gain it, financial reasons, or merely because two cousins 'love' each other.

You have no idea that blood lines are 'of the utmost importance' to the upper class, nor why. While wealthy families may have kept better records of their family for various reasons, you have no facts to back up your claim that they are 'of the utmost importance' to the elite. All you can do is speak so matter-of-factly about people and groups whom you do not know

The point is, the evidence is well-documented who keeps it in the family, the Elite.

Why deny any correlation whatsoever betwen wealth, power, and the importance of family?

Any more important than a common person who's proud of his heritage?

More important?

Did you just ask me if cultural heritage is more or less important than wealth and power? Because they are both handed down in families you have asked me to weigh them?

Money and power give you status which heritage alone does not. Cultural heritage might give you political awareness.

Family bloodlines gives you political connections. Right, the Elite are just like the Profane, and I am making baseless claims, because even the very Voice of Reason is not good enough for some.

I understand fully that there are many people are related to George Bush. I have been involved in genealogy for quite a while, so I know what kind of figures shoud be expected. As I said George Bush should only be related to no more than a few people in each administration, but he is related in many administartins to a majority (through immigrants to America and their descendants).

What you say about being able to find connections to anybody is invalid. If you were to find out how many cabinet members are related to Bill Clinton you would probably find it to be around 20, where as with Bush there are 100's of them. Obviously we are all related at some point in the distant past, but my research is within the last 400 years.

Also it is very unlikely that I am related to Bush in this range as I am a Welsh-Armenian.

I will not go into explaining this, as I said it is a complicated topic and for me to explain what I know about it would take a long time. If you are interested you will be able to read about it in my book, along with charts showing all the relations.

Originally posted by akilles
Did you just ask me if cultural heritage is more or less important than wealth and power? Because they are both handed down in families you have asked me to weigh them?

Money and power give you status which heritage alone does not. Cultural heritage might give you political awareness.

Family bloodlines gives you political connections. Right, the Elite are just like the Profane, and I am making baseless claims, because even the very Voice of Reason is not good enough for some.

You stated that bloodlines were 'of the utmost importance' to the 'elite'. My argument is based solely upon the fact that you know neither the 'elite', nor their intentions and therefore are not qualified to be arguing about this.

And are you calling yourself the voice of reason?

The point being that Bush should not be related to so many poeple in such a short time period.

Professional estimates at how many Americans are related through people who lived about 400 years ago give a maximum of 6%

Within this range George W. is related to 62.5 % of the Lincoln administration. What should also be noted that the members of Lincoln's cabinet were born around 1740, and at this time far fewer americans were related to eachother.

The figures speak for themselves, ancestry is an important factor in the rise to political power. I am not saying that people are selected simply because of their blood for positions of power. The way I see it is because they are the hereditary upper class, and are blessed with things such as money and college education.

sebatwerk, are you refering to me above?

I don't speak of bloodlines.

Yeah, you don't bother with that 'aspect' of research?

Sebatwerk, I didn't call myself anything. Sometimes things have to be discussed more than they can be factually proven, that is where the Voice of Reason plays an important role.

Have you tied these blood relations back to money and power back in England yet?

I'd say its a little more than being born with access to university, although that would be a big deal more than 150 years ago. I'd say it had just as much to do with the 'born to rule' mentality, and the examples that are set for them in childhood, and then Ivy League universities.

Originally posted by akilles
Yeah, you don't bother with that 'aspect' of research?

Sebatwerk, I didn't call myself anything. Sometimes things have to be discussed more than they can be factually proven, that is where the Voice of Reason plays an important role.

Have you tied these blood relations back to money and power back in England yet?

I'd say its a little more than being born with access to university, although that would be a big deal more than 150 years ago. I'd say it had just as much to do with the 'born to rule' mentality, and the examples that are set for them in childhood, and then Ivy League universities.

Yet, after everything you say, he was still voted into office. Just like a peanut farmer was.

Jimmy Carter is a bit like Bill Clinton, both came from poor background, but both are descended from certain elites. It can be disputed weather those links are relevant or not.

I would have to agree just out of sheer politness. Indeed Bush and Kerry are indeed related to Dracula. Their affiliation goes back several hundred years. Their forefathers started "The Drip and Drool", lactated just outside the city limits of the old town of Suckingsire D.C. They of course were raised in a different parts of the town when they were younger and yet still uncorrupted according to some iffy figures. One of the boys grew up to become the President of the United States and the other little boy grew up to become a Dirty Rotten Scoundrel and eventally Gov. of the Northern state of Mass.
One little known fact is that the club their respective fathers started, didn't know what kind of influence this would eventually have on the young men. When they were elected into office, there they sharpened their skills of fast talking and patting people on the back.(You see they did this to find a soft spot to stick the knife when no one was looking.)
It was their custom when they invited wealthy businessmen into their oriffices, they would also request that the men make a donation so the Pres. and the Gov. would be able to serve them better. This step in modern Govt. is called the "Shakedown" Somewhere along the lines of their duties, they forgot all about the small man and the pressing matters that affected the nation and all the people who paid their saleries. Both men were known to engage in pissing contests on the job and this did not sit well with the average man on the street. Finally.........
The people of the U.S. got fed up with D.C. not taking care of our nations existing problems of hunger, lost jobs, and skyrocketing medical care and we cannot forget the high taxes. Fast forward to 2008 election. Jan.21 Election Day having had quite enoungh of such treatment, the good American citizens took control and ownership of the Govt. without any loss of life or blood and this just broke the will of the two men and Gore could be heard running through the streets shouting" Blood! I want Blood!" Sen. Byrd could be heard sitting in a corner saying over and over"Pity,Pity,Pity" All the people who were out of work were given jobs in the Govt. where they could earn a good living. Anyone who was hungry was able to purchase all the food they and their families could eat at bargin prices because the new Govt. didn't have to keep prices high like the old Govt. did because we were able to keep inflation low and artifically high prices were cut out. You'd be surprised at how much this move was able to save.The sick and infirm were able to be cured because the major medical companies had the cure to many maladies including cancer and were sitting on it all this time to fatten their pockets along with the shareholders. The morale to this is don't always believe what your govt. tells you. Question it and if you do not get the answer you want or it is not right in your heart, find the ones who are in the same boat you are in and band together to elicit effective change no matter how drastic but always by peaceful means and try not to let too many people pat you on your back.