In response to my recent post about candidates Obama and Huckabee, Ian noted that during his entire time as a voter, the President was either a Bush or a Clinton. George Bush was in the White House from 1989 – 1993, followed by Bill Clinton till January, 2001, followed by the first Bush’s son George. If Senator Hillary Clinton is elected our next president, the dual dynasty would continue at least four more years.
Even more remarkable, she could be elected for a second term. By then, perhaps, former Florida Governor Jeb Bush might choose to throw his hat in the ring. In that unlikely, but possible scenario, the United States would have had a Bush or a Clinton as President for thirty-two years; thirty-six years if Jeb served two terms! I wonder if Chelsea Clinton has political ambitions.
This isn’t the first time multiple family members held the country’s highest office. Members of the Adams family were Presidents #2 and #6; two Roosevelts held the office in the first half of the 20th century. In the lifetime of fifty-somethings, three different Kennedy brothers ran for President; one was elected, one was killed during the campaign and the third dropped out but has been a Senator for forty-five years.
Do you think this situation is good or bad? Or does family background have any bearing on a candidate’s qualifications?
And what about race, religion and gender? Back in the 1960s, John Kennedy was ridiculed for being Catholic; and in that era it would have been unthinkable for an African-American to even be a candidate, much less a serious contender. A woman as President? The response to that question could easily have been “stop that silly talk, honey, and make me some dinner.”
Our society has come a long way, even if you only look back through the Bush-Clinton years. The lineup of Presidential candidates at this point in the election cycle is closer to the diversity of our country’s population than at any time in our history. We have more to choose from than just two old, white, Protestant men.
We are closer now than ever to the dream of the man whose birthday we celebrate with a national holiday tomorrow. If Dr. King had lived, do you think he would have run for President?
A Little Something I Wrote
3 months ago
2 comments:
Bernie - I wouldn't at all have been surprised if Rev. King had had at least four years in the White House in the past twenty if he'd lived. If anything, I bet he'd have at least been a vice president.
The whole issue I have with future Bushes running (Jeb, Jenna - yikes!) or future Clintons (Hillary, Chelsea, Roger - double yoiks!) is that they're known quantities. We know more or less what we're getting when someone from the same family enters the fray.
At least with some of the others, we're truly getting a fresh perspective, for better or for worse.
All I know is that my preferred candidate already dropped out. Maybe someone will pick him up as a vice president.
Ian
I agree that we need fresh perspective. For all the choices we have, I'm still undecided, although I've almost narrowed it down to two. The primaries in my state are 3 weeks away, so I better start doing better research.
Post a Comment