The Man Who Would Be King

« Return to Article

Discuss

Member Comments

  • Posted By: flyme @ 10/11/2008 8:14:22 AM

    Sally returned to that child molester TJ because her children were there, and after years of TJ begging her to return. It is documented that she had lovers in France where she and TJ daughter lived a lavish lifestyle. But a mother's yearning for her children brought her back. And TJ(Tom Jefferson) manipulated that maternal calling for his own personal sexual predatory practices. If the colours were reversed and Thomas Jefferson was a black man and Sally was white the tales would be different. Think about it!

  • Posted By: the king @ 10/11/2008 8:09:21 AM

    Time to get a king our Govt is faultering under the hand of greed,special intrest groups, and corruption. to name only a few. Aking might just give our country the little touch os humanity it needs.

  • Posted By: loisann @ 10/11/2008 8:00:32 AM

    I am curious...how can you be a "direct" descendant of Washington if he had no children? Adoption cannot replace the actual bloodline, and Martha's children, both of whom were adopted by Washington, were not of his bloodline. If he is of Washington's bloodline, nowhere in the article does it say that a DNA was done to prove he was of the bloodline; and if he is of the bloodline, he would have come from one of Washington's siblings...NOT Washington himself. This is very sloppy journalism.

  • Posted By: lelandbarrows @ 10/08/2008 8:54:15 PM

    How about George Washington's children by various African-American slave women?

    • Posted By: Momof4inAustin @ 10/09/2008 12:37:50 AM

      Because most reputable historians agree that George Washington was probably sterile, he could not have fathered any children with his female slaves. That is one of the main reasons why there are not African-Americans living today who claim a lineage to Washington the way that there are claims (now proven correct with DNA evidence) from African Americans to be descendants of Thom. Jefferson and Sally Hemmings.

      • Posted By: abbahawk @ 10/11/2008 7:55:15 AM

        DNA did NOT show folks to be descendants of Tj, but rather a descendant of his grandfather Jefferson. It is just as likelyu or more so that it was his brother Randolph who was noted ror "parying" in the slave quarters. Beside Sallywas a slave by choice. she ws free in France & returned to VA with TJ.

    • Posted By: mominnm @ 10/08/2008 10:04:11 PM

      Those children were illegitimate and would therefore have been ineligible for the hypothetical crown.

  • Posted By: adams.02@hotmail.com @ 10/11/2008 7:53:37 AM

    I am a direct descendant of John Adams, any chance I could have been king?

  • Posted By: adams.02@hotmail.com @ 10/11/2008 7:52:52 AM

    I am a direct descendant of John Adams, any chance it could have been me?

  • Posted By: abbahawk @ 10/11/2008 7:42:01 AM

    Where are the editors.
    !) no professional genealogistor historian would misuse the word descendant.
    2) any competent editor would have caught such a disregard of correct English.
    or was this a "unique" event?
    Besides GW was llikely sterile from VD that led indirectly to his death. The father of our country had no children.

  • Posted By: flyme @ 10/11/2008 7:38:40 AM

    So would George Washington 'black' son have been knighted the 'First American Black Knight'?

  • Posted By: abbahawk @ 10/11/2008 7:37:34 AM

    Some researcher or reporter needs to learn ENGLISH, they are not descendants of George, thye from his BROTHER.
    Does no one understand correct definitions??

  • Posted By: Jamvincymaican @ 10/11/2008 7:15:18 AM

    That's not a correct use of the adjective 'staunch'. I think the correct word you are searching for is the verb 'stanch'.

  • Posted By: siciliandude @ 10/11/2008 6:27:00 AM

    What a very interesting idea that will probably make a good book. Kudos to Ancestry.com and all the researchers over the years . It makes also one think of"What if the South had won the Civil War"? Texas would more than likely be its own country. This is fun information and that all that it is. It is niether ignorant nor wrong. It is just a fun fact of what could have happened. Anyone who takes this serious needs to have
    their head examined.

  • Posted By: miamijer @ 10/10/2008 12:35:30 PM

    Only an Obama supporter would make a remark like this: "I thought we already had a monarchy?"

    What a joke! If this "prince" used his head and looked at the BIG picture, he would support term limits for Congressmen, Senators, governors, and all other elected officials at every level. Bush is NOT the problem.

    • Posted By: reds @ 10/11/2008 6:14:54 AM

      this is agreat idea then we might be able to stop the rip offs at the local levels all the way up and including the conngres and seneat

  • Posted By: LearnFromHistory @ 10/11/2008 4:43:00 AM

    "What If" The world would be a different place today if he had decided that being a King sounded better than President.

  • Posted By: wazzamattaU @ 10/11/2008 4:16:40 AM

    How ignorant! We came to this country to get away from kings, because we believe the very idea of 'royalty' is just wrong.

  • Posted By: allthatglitters @ 10/11/2008 4:09:41 AM

    I thought that was one of things we originally fought against England for, what not to have a King. Even though they still try to run this country yet today, behind the scenes. What a dumb article.

  • Posted By: allthatglitters @ 10/11/2008 4:07:38 AM

    I thought that was what we fought against England for, was not to have a king. Even though they still try in everyway they can yet today to run our country yet today. What a dumb article.

  • Posted By: CCFORLIFE08 @ 10/08/2008 1:56:17 PM

    wow. Bill Washington is an idiot. his ancestor is possible the greatest president we ever had and he supports that moron of a candidate obama. what a fool

    • Posted By: MuskogeeLadii @ 10/10/2008 7:14:12 PM

      Enter Your Comment THE ONLY MORON or should I say MORONS are PALIN AND McCAIN...your a fool..

  • Posted By: blkft @ 10/09/2008 12:22:59 PM

    royalty Blah native americans (what racist ppl call indians) are the real royalty in this country infact for all of north america . Thank you Thank you

    • Posted By: MuskogeeLadii @ 10/10/2008 6:32:20 PM

      Totally Agree...DEVIANT, THIEVES...NATIVE AMERICAN...are rightfully so the TRUE ROYALTY...not this ridiculous lost MONARCHY ROYALTY....BS, BS, BS,

    • Posted By: MuskogeeLadii @ 10/10/2008 6:28:29 PM

      I soooooo agree with blkft...NATIVE AMERICANS...ARE the real royalty. not these so called "MONARCHY" lost decendents..PLEASE..YES..THIEVES are what they are...Proud MUSkOGEE

  • Posted By: mominnm @ 10/09/2008 8:21:30 PM

    This is for cani77, this article was about America's ''Lost Monarchy', not about the political propoganda you are spouting, over, and over, and over again. You need to post to a blog that accepts your rhetoric because it's not welcome here where people are having open, relevant discussions concerning this article. Please stop repasting your nonsensical artical and taking up the space meant for real people's comments.

    • Posted By: jimbo3800 @ 10/10/2008 5:35:37 PM

      Thank you. Well said. What a bunch of tiresome nonsense that is....

  • Posted By: mw2108 @ 10/09/2008 11:45:52 PM

    Have you seen some of the blacks who are descendant from the slaves at Mt. Vernon in the movie at the new museum near the home? These blacks bear a striking resemblance to Washington. There's no doubt in my mind that they are the real descendants of George Washington, a man who had no legitimate children with Martha. Your King would be the same race as your next President.

    • Posted By: sharenews @ 10/10/2008 1:47:15 AM


      I agree with Mominnm below. These illegitamate children of Washington would never have been recognized as potential heirs to the throne in a monarchal society if George chose that route.

      But at least we have progressed enough in society here in the US to have a black candidate/nominee run for President in 2008. Too bad he could not have been a black man with ethics, morals, values for which he upheld (which he has proven he cannot by many times throwing these things that establish character out of the window and has done (continues to do) anything he can to become the first black POTUS. He may end up being the first black POTUS, but he will go down as being the first black President of the US who got elected without with minimum legislative experience in Washington (running for POTUS after getting into US senate 2 yrs later - with a thin list of self-led accomplishments), but also having made choices to surround himself with a long list of radical -leftist/liberal - felons, slumlords, Washington DC and PLO terrorists, race-conscious anti- America hate-filled pastors, goals to learn and teach the philosophy and radicial tactics (intimidations, ridicule, race-baiting, etc.) to pass onto to students who became part of the ACORN org. back then on the south side of CHICAGO and eventually spread out throughout the country to practice their radical learnings (tactics used to force local banks to take on risky loans for the poor contribution to our current financial meltdown and tactics used, as we are also seeing now with voter register fraud that is currently being investigated now with ACORN).

      If this is how America wants to ensure that we elect the first black POTUS, so be it. But what a disgraceful way to attain this most important role in the USA.

Reply

Report Abuse

Enter comments if any for reporting abuse