Obama: DNA evidence of slave ancestor on mother's side

Ancestry.com has done an extensive study on the roots of Barack Obama and have discovered his mother has direct roots to a black American slave.

Not really surprising since quite a number of white Americans have black roots/ancestry even though some of them would not admit it or just plain don't know this.

The Ancestry.com team did two years of research to puzzle this out and looked through thousands of pages of colonial records. The researchers got the DNA from the Bunch family and, even without the documented connection to John Punch, they say they're very certain of their finding about the president's slave ancestor on mother's side.

New evidence shows slave ancestry on Obama's mother side

Video...

reply to post by Jaellma
Let alone what likely-true bit you mention about white americans, I would be absolutely shocked if almost all black americans with any sort of roots in the US don't trace back to slaves earlier in our history.

It seems to be almost a given, doesn't it?

And? Was Michelle a slave? Was Barack a slave? Was I a slave owner? No, No, and No. Ask yourself why this is continually brought up? (by the left). Keeping racism alive is the answer.

reply to post by Jaellma


OH goodie, when will people get the fact we are all related, and lay this racism BS to rest?

Originally posted by Stormdancer777
reply to post by Jaellma

 

OH goodie, when will people get the fact we are all related, and lay this racism BS to rest?

Well said. Whether you believe in creation or evolution, go far enough back and we've ALL got the same parents.

Every civilization throughout history has had slaves. Why do we only think of slavery in terms of the US history?

LOL. Show me where there is racism anywhere in my post and I will apologize. I stated a fact and understandably, some folks get offended. SMH.

Originally posted by Jaellma
LOL. Show me where there is racism anywhere in my post and I will apologize. I stated a fact and understandably, some folks get offended. SMH.

I didn't find your post racist, you simply reported a fact.

What does SMH mean? I see it a lot but haven't a clue.

reply to post by smyleegrl

Stormdancer said people need to stop with the racism. Not sure where she is going with that. LOL.

SMH means either "Shaking My Head" or "Scratching My Head" as in being perplexed.

So the media will do THIS story, but no stories on his complete failure on the economy and intentional division of the country along race and class lines? this is nothing but more slavish (no pun intended) feel good propaganda from the Obama re-election campaign media.

He's also related to Dick Cheney - who would have loved to own slaves if it were allowed today.

So, cool story I guess.

Originally posted by Jaellma
Ancestry.com has done an extensive study on the roots of Barack Obama and have discovered his mother has direct roots to a black American slave.

Not really surprising since quite a number of white Americans have black roots/ancestry even though some of them would not admit it or just plain don't know this.

The Ancestry.com team did two years of research to puzzle this out and looked through thousands of pages of colonial records. The researchers got the DNA from the Bunch family and, even without the documented connection to John Punch, they say they're very certain of their finding about the president's slave ancestor on mother's side.

New evidence shows slave ancestry on Obama's mother side

Your thread title is misleading. The article title is "Surprising link found in Obama's family tree." I've been under the impression that thread titles had to match the article title. Have I understood that incorrectly?

Your claim of "DNA evidence of slave ancestor on mother's side" is fully misleading; the article states "We found that, through DNA testing done by members of the Bunch family, that their direct ancestors are of sub-Saharan African origin." - not that the President is directly related by supported DNA evidence.

The evidence is wholly inconclusive because "Though records are incomplete, the Ancestry.com genealogists say the slave John Punch is the only likely person to have been the father of John Bunch, sometime before 1637." They "believe," though records are incomplete = they don't KNOW. An incomplete paper trail (which they admit) leaves nothing but supposition and supposition, even by the most advanced experts is just that: supposition.

It's like someone from NASA saying "I believe in extraterrestrial life" - many do, even experts in the space industry, but there's no proof; just supposition.

Further, while both males and females have mtDNA, only females carry it from female-to-female down the line. A male will inherit mtDNA from his mother but it will not pass to his children. Source. Similarly, paternal DNA (the Y chromosome) passes father to son to son to son; a daughter will not inherit the Y chromosome DNA. Source

What does that mean? It means that DNA from John Punch/John Bunch did NOT pass to Stanley Anne Dunham Obama Soetoro, and, thus, to her son, our President, that's what it means. No DNA evidence. Period. Except that the Bunches can be traced to sub-Saharan Africa.

Additionally, Three indentured servants—John Punch, James Gregory, and Victor —ran away and were recaptured. James Gregory and Victor, both white, were given “thirty stripes” and an additional four years of servitude, whereas John Punch, a Negro, was sentenced to serve the remainder of his life. - the two white men had 4 years added to their indenture while Punch had the remainder of his life added to his indenture. So, a "slave" for life? No; an indentured servant for life, by sentence, implying an Appeal could have been filed. Legal semantics? Probably, but very important when conveying history correctly.

It has been historically fully documented and accepted that John Casor was the first person fully enslaved for life; that is, a human being actually OWNED by another human being; not indentured for a period for life (Source) because Casor's "owner" claimed that there never was any indenture but that he "had ye Negro (for) his life."

At the end of the day, why this article and acting as though some great discovery has been made? The article clearly states " ... The bunch family over the generations continued to intermarry with white people and just became white for all intents and purposes" which brings us right back around to the truth that President Obama has Z-E-R-O connection/shared roots with African Americans who self-identify as Blacks whose ancestors were enslaved, except by marriage if Mrs. Obama's family has that history.

It strikes me as nothing but typical political crapola at campaign time in an effort to identify with a sector of the populace in order to pander for votes. Or it's an incalculable coincidence that such superficial findings have been coalesced into an article deemed "newsworthy" just at this time.

All the article really documents is that there was no significant racial discrimination when the Colonies first started up; that all came after the Casor (Anthony vs Parker) case.

None of us are "pure" anything - we ARE all related, though.

Translation of this report:

- Obama's relations were slaves.
- You (white America) are guilty.
- Vote for him in November and get absolution for your sin.

Originally posted by Jaellma
reply to post by smyleegrl

 

Stormdancer said people need to stop with the racism. Not sure where she is going with that. LOL.

SMH means either "Shaking My Head" or "Scratching My Head" as in being perplexed.

Not you specifically.

Ok.

And...

What is the point of knowing that, or broadcasting it to the world, exactly? I'm mystified.

Obama's ancestors on his fathers side probably sold that slave.
That would mean Obama's mother has more rights to receiving reparations than Obama himself.