Republocrats. Aren't You the Least Bit BOTHERED, Anyone?

[Emit]

"4 years of Bush, followed by 8 years of Clinton, followed by 8 years of Bush, followed by 8 years of Clinton..."

"There's a pattern here..."

"Even if you think the Clintons are personally beyond reproach, moral paragons ... aren't you the least bit bothered by the prospect of a two-family political system? Of this oligarchical double helix? Isn't this all slightly Un-American?"



It's even worse, folks. Mo Rocca leaves out the 8 years of Bush Sr.'s VP before his 4-year Presidency.

Bush, Clinton, Bush, Clinton ... Who Needs Elections?

Suddenly - and FINALLY - people are talking about the problem of presidential dynasties here in America. The possibility of Bush-Clinton-Bush-Clinton (up to 28 years of 2-family rule) is looming with Hillary on the rise. (Add to that 8 run-up years of Bush the Father as VP to Reagan.)

I hate to sound like a smarty pants. But why not? Here is a commentary I taped for CBS Sunday Morning a year and a half ago on this subject. (Hence the references to Jeb Bush as candidate.) Forgive the over-enunciation and the annoying billowy shirt. I was new on the job...

Video at link
http://news.aol.com/newsbloggers/2007/09/28/bush-clinton-bush-clinton-who-needs-elections /

Also on You Tube:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lr0TkxReKuk

Let's widen the gene pool...

[ZombieHorde]

1. Policies trump gene pools for this voter.

That said, I wanted Kucinich, but his chances are looking slim. :P

Now I want a non-Republican.

[Joyce78]

4. Yep I'm tired too.

[Emit]

6. It's mighty depressing having to go from Kucinich to Clinton, I imagine.

Policies? What are the differences between Obama's and Clinton's policies?

[ZombieHorde]

12. Differences.

Policies? What are the differences between Obama's and Clinton's policies?

Very little as far as I am concerned.

It's mighty depressing having to go from Kucinich to Clinton, I imagine.

I am not going from Kucinich to Clinton, I am going from Kucinich to non-Republican.

[Emit]

32. And what I should have added, too

was that I, myself, have gone from Kucinich to Edwards to Obama (with a brief period of supporting Clinton over Obama) and will vote for Clinton if she's the nominee. McCain is not an option.

[ZombieHorde]

44. McCain is not an option.

No doubt about that.

[crim son]

2. Crap, you just gave me the heebie jeebies.

"Even if you think the Clintons are personally beyond reproach, moral paragons ... aren't you the least bit bothered by the prospect of a two-family political system?"

If the Clintons are personally beyond reproach, moral paragons, then I would happily embrace the short-term notion of a two-family political system, without any real concern that this might become the permanent state of affairs. Happily for the OP, who apparently isn't a Clinton supporter, Bill and Hillary are most certainly not beyond reproach... moral paragons they are not.

I'd like to know if there is ever such a candidate looking to occupy the whitehouse, because that would be the time to start believing in miracles.

[Emit]

14. Just to clarify

those are Mo Rocca's words, from the video clip, in case you didn't watch it.

[crim son]

16. Oh, I didn't, hence my stupid response!

Carry on :)

[Johnny__Motown]

3. the first Bush was V.P. for 8 years too, lets not forget that

[Emit]

31. I made reference to that in the OP, but, you know what I left out?

Bush Sr. was also head of the CIA for a year or so in the late 70's

[dysfunctional press]

33. and he was IN the cia pretty much from it's inception...

the bay of pigs was HIS baby, all the way.

and i'm guessing he had a pretty big hand in developing "operation northwoods".

[Emit]

34. Yes!

Thanks for clarifying.

[Cha]

5. hilary thinks mccain has

more experience.

[opihimoimoi]

10. Listen/look to McCains picture of his command and you will find him LACKING....

All Band aid crap......

[GeorgeGist]

29. Is not the length of experience ...

but fulfillment that's important.

[goodgd_yall]

7. Oh, darn

I thought this was an OP about Obama's supporters---those Republican crossovers.

[Beacool]

8. Presidents and ex presidents belong to the same "club".

They do communicate with each other even when they belong to different parties. What's the big deal?

[Emit]

15. Most former presidents don't have wives who are running for president. n/t

[Zookeeper]

9. So, we pass on the Clinton this time, everyone has a break...

then we'll be looking at Jeb in 2012. I'm not crazy about the cycle, but the Bushes aren't going away.

[Beacool]

11. Neither are the Clintons................

:eyes:

[Zookeeper]

13. The Clintons have one child....

There is an endless supply of Bushes.

:eyes:

[Dogmudgeon]

17. Chelsea can start to remedy that oversight in about nine months.

:evilgrin:

--p!

[Zookeeper]

19. True, but imagine how many Bush spawn could surface...

between now and the time Chelsea's child was ready to run. (Shudder.)

My original point (not well stated) was that there is no chance of the presidency bouncing back and forth between the Bushes and Clintons. Just because we pass on a Clinton this time, doesn't mean we won't be stuck with another Bush.

[Dogmudgeon]

25. Yeah -- I'm not impressed with the "dynasty" complaint

After all, the Adamses and the Roosevelts worked out pretty well.

Hillary ought to be judged on her own merits or lack thereof, not by her last name -- for good or bad.

--p!

[Emit]

41. Mo Rocca on the video clip explains why he gives these guys a pass

It's a funny video if you didn't watch it

[LaStrega]

21. exactly what I was thinking!

And wondering if she's all starry eyed ... looking forward to her future Presidency.

[krkaufman]

18. Jeebus. 32 years with either a Bush or Clinton in the White House.

36 if Hillary gets re-elected. Oy.

We are sheeple.

[Zookeeper]

20. If Senator Clinton is elected, she would be the last Clinton...

for a while. The threat of another Bush in the White House isn't going to go away since there are so damned many of them.

[krkaufman]

23. Right. Except Chelsea will be of age any time now...

... and certainly after another Bush term.

[Zookeeper]

24. I'd be satisfied to end the cycle with one more Clinton....

rather than end it with Chimpy and have Jeb look like a fresh face in 2012.

[krkaufman]

27. I'll raise you and say I'd be satisfied to end the cycle with W.

enuf.

[Zookeeper]

38. Clearly, that is your preference.

I just think the "dynasty" complaint is one-sided and benefits the Bushes.

OK, "enough."

[Emit]

39. If Hillary wins the nomination, and is successful in the GE,

and in 2012, she is successful with another run, can it then be assumed that both the Clintons and the Bushes are beneficiaries of the "dynasty" thingy? ;)

[Zookeeper]

46. I would think there would be some real weight to the dynasty

argument at that point, and it might prevent another Bush for a while.

'Just speculating. I wouldn't bet my life on anything in politics, though.

[Emit]

47. .

"I wouldn't bet my life on anything in politics, though."

No kidding :)

[grantcart]

22. Having lived outside of the United States for 20 years I can

tell you that most intelligent educated people look at this and things like the Kennedy Assasination and they simply do not believe that we have a free democracy.

The election of Obama will completely stun them and cause them to look at the United States in a new way.

Of course if he wins most of them will simply think, uh oh somebody fucked up somewhere lol


I do not believe that in the final analysis Americans will elect another member of these two families back to the Whitehouse. It

really reminds me of the third world countries I lived in where they all winked and nodded and just changed the leadership

back and forth amongst themselves.

[bigbrother05]

30. Having come back recently (5 yrs in Germany), agree

They were all WTF after the 2000 fiasco, but convinced that the US would self-correct in 2004. That election shocked even the most pro-American Germans. The reassessment was wrenching for a world that probably believed in the US ideals more than the average American did. For all the rhetoric until then, they truly believed W in 2000 was an aberration that the US voters would not tolerate. They were almost as devastated as the folks at DU.

Now, in 2008, the thought that a woman or a black man could be the US President has given the world hope again. Either one of our candidates would be welcomed, but were Obama to become the face of our country, the world's oppressed would rejoice with us.

[grantcart]

37. and with Russia going to sham elections and China not maturing politically

The US again would be a singular voice of leadership for much of the intellectual and even the business elite.

[autorank]

26. K*R Outstanding Post of the Primary Season !!!!!!!

[LiberalAndProud]

28. Not much.

[Orsino]

35. It's totally unfair, of course, to blame Clinton for her last name...

...but yes, dynasties are bad, no matter how benevolent the monarch.

I'm glad that Clinton isn't just skating into office. Even if she wins the nomination and GE, it's good that she had some serious opposition.

[whatchamacallit]

36. Ha what? Isn't Hillary Clinton a CLINTON?

:shrug:

[stillcool]

40. there's that experience...

every one likes to talk about. I really wish the Clinton Campaign hadn't dragged their own name through the mud. It didn't have to be this way.

[LostinVA]

42. Republocrat?

FLAMEBAIT.

[Emit]

43. It's a reference to Mo Rocca's video in the OP

You would have to see the clip to understand

[amborin]

45. Clinton is a true progressive

and let's not forget:

Obama praised Reagan

and wants to cozy up to rethuglicans

[Emit]

48. Clinton is the DLC candidate n/t

[Emit]

49. 28 years, folks!

Do we want to make that 32? 36?!