Talk of Bush - Clinton Dynasty is a Big Fat Red Herring
Posted on February 28, 2007
| buzz-it! | Huff it!
All over the blogosphere I keep reading the phrase “Bush - Clinton Dynasty,” especially in readers’ comments to blogs. WTF? When were these two families combined? It’s hard to believe the two families are of the same species, let alone sharing some genetic lineage. I wanted to find out who manufactured this particular bit of garbage, but my Google skills didn’t help me out this time. Of course I suspect any number of personalities from Fox News. Folks over there swim with the red herrings — which is quite a feat, since smoking fish ’til they’re red, generally makes swimming difficult for them.
It may be fair to say the powerful Bush family is somehow analogous to dynasty, but to connect all the years of the Bushes with Bill Clinton’s presidency and say that somehow that represents continuous familial power is a serious load of…herring.
From a Joan Wallace interview of Kevin Phillips in Salon.com:
Looking at four generations of Bushes, and all that inherited wealth and power, there’s really no comparison between the Bushes and the Clintons.
No, they’re not the same at this point. But if she were to run and win in 2008, the idea of a wife succeeding her husband is just as interesting as a son succeeding his father.
In some ways it’s more interesting, but it’s not a dynasty. You can even quibble about the use of the word “dynasty” with the Bushes, because obviously, he didn’t inherit the presidency. We did elect him.
Obviously? I’m not sure it’s obvious at all. [Laughs.]
The power of the Bush family is well-documented, going back to Prescott Bush, a Senator from Connecticut. His son is George H.W. Bush, POTUS #41, who was head of CIA, then Vice President for 8 years before his 4 years as President. Two of his sons became governors of wealthy states, George W., then serving as president (POTUS #43) for two terms.
The Clinton family? Bill is a fulfillment of the American dream as told to school children. A boy raised by a single mother with little means who, through ambition and hard work, became governor of his state and then president of the United States. He married a talented woman who became a successful lawyer, and who after putting her own career on hold to be first lady, was elected to the U.S. Senate. Clearly connections and name recognition played a part in her political success, but her marriage could as easily have proved to work against her.
There is no comparison and certainly no connection between the two families. Bush family privilege clearly is the source of W’s successes, as a person of his talent seems far better suited for appliance sales or leading tent revivals.
Whatever her connections — and few get anywhere without them — Hillary’s successes, present and future, are her own.
Sphere ItComments
Leave a Reply
