Monday, May 09, 2005

Hey, that's a good point
Dave Justus keyed me in to a piece by Joe Klein about Hillary's prospects in 2008. The column concludes with a point that, for some reason, I've never considered:

There is something fundamentally un-American—and very European—about the Clintons and the Bushes trading the office every eight years, with stale, familiar corps of retainers, supporters and enemies. Bill Clinton was a good President. Hillary Clinton is a good Senator. But enough already. (And that goes for you too, Jeb.)
Everyone always talks about the Bush dynasty if Jeb runs and wins in '08, or even 2012, but this is the first mention I've heard of the fact that if Hillary runs and wins it would mean at least 24 consecutive years of either a Bush or a Clinton in the White House—four years each of Bush, Clinton, Clinton, Bush, Bush, Clinton. In some ways that's almost more disturbing to me than Bush, Clinton, Clinton, Bush, Bush, (Jeb) Bush, and not just for reasons of political alignment. I think I"m more comfortable with one family running one party (and even winning the White House regularly) than I am with the idea of one family running each of both major parties.


Diane101 said...

Oh Brian, I do struggle to uderstand you, but always fail.
It is more disturbing to you to have Clinton as part of the dynastic pattern that it is with Bush's. I guess you fail to find any problem with this administration and so you could wish for more of the same. I find that to be so strange, that you cannot see the looming problems Bush has created, nurtured and fostered.

RFTR said...

A couple of things that need clearing up—maybe this will help you understand me.

1) I find a LOT of fault with this administration—that doesn't mean I think a Dem administration would please me any more.

1a) Finding fault with this administration does not necessarily imply that I would likewise find fault with a JEB Bush administration. I can tell you from my own personal experience that a presidency held by my brother would be significantly different than one held by me—I think the same would be true of the Bush brothers.

3) As I tried to make clear in the initial post, my fear of rotating back to a Clinton presidency has little if anything to do with political affiliation. I do not fear one party being dominated by a single family, because if we get sick of that family, the other party can always step up with any number of alternatives. If, however, BOTH major parties are putting forward presidential candidates from one family and one family only, then we have a much more significant problem.

Does that make it a little more clear?

Joe said...

Makes sense. But then, what if we get a Kennedy in the White House? Since that Democratic dynasty began first, you'd rightfully have to fear Jeb more... Heh.

I still think that if the Republicans are in any way smart, they'll pick Condoleeza or McCain for '08, though.

Irina Tsukerman said...

Hillary vs Condi; Condi vs.Hillary... a third-party candidate wins... I don't think either of them will make it past the primaries.