How nice of you to change the topic. No one said anything about who can and can’t join a conversation. The topic was about allegedly being “worried” about what was being posted, and I gave the context of your dialogue to illustrate that you were being a hypocrite by posting a picture of a worry stone.
@I don't agree with your Anglo-Saxon angle. None are more Anglo-Saxon than Germans.
@The French would have been out of luck under that as well as they descended from Gauls.
@Think Norman Saxon.
So, if I understand this properly, BP was saying, as he understood things, people of German (Saxon)/French (Norman) descent couldn't be POTUS. The phrase used was non-Anglo Saxon. By that reasoning basically only those of British/German (Anglo/Saxon) descent could be POTUS. Yet strangely enough Anglo-Saxons comprise only a small part of Britain because after the Norman (French)/Saxon (German) invasion their descendents predominately became Anglo-Normans after the Norman conquest of 1066. William was from Normandy (French) and Normandy was previously taken over by the Saxons/Franks (the Franks were Germans).
@Is the "race" component supposed to be because Franklin used the term "swarthy" to describe the complexion of the non-English Europeans such as Russians and Swedes??
Why are you asking me when, IMO, Franklin did a fine job of expressing himself in his own words? And BP isn't here to clear up his intent so one can only presume.
All Africa is black or tawny. Asia chiefly tawny. America (exclusive of the new Comers) wholly so.
And in Europe, the Spaniards, Italians, French, Russians and Swedes, are generally of what we call a swarthy Complexion; as are the Germans also, the Saxons only excepted, who with the English, make the principal Body of White People on the Face of the Earth.
Tawny and swarthy...Seems pretty clear cut to me as to what "races" Franklin meant.
England is a hodgepodge of national descendents and true "non-Anglo Saxons" are a small subset of that nation.
I hope I've made myself clearer this time.