Here Is One Of My Problems With Both Hillary Clinton And George Bush

[DistressedAmerican]

I am tired of American's adopting rich powerful families and voting members of them into (and out of for that matter) office in large part based on other family baggage. What someone's father, mother, brother, wife, or cousin did in office is not a reliable indicator of how they will behave. If Bush I and II do not prove that, nothing will.

I find that the American obsession with celebrity enters the arena of politics here. Not in the Ronny and Aaaahhnoold sense (a topic for another thread). But, in the sense that Americans think that they KNOW people that they have seen on TV. They think that they know the relatives of politicians they have seen on TV. Like they have some special insight into them as a person. That gives them a willingness to trust them more than they would otherwise (again see Bush I and II).

That is worrisome as we all know that politicians have carefully crafted public personas. None of us know anyone from television. We should cut out the identifying so strongly with names and familiar faces.

I also object to the collection of so very much power in the hands of such a select few. It is exclusionary to the little guy. It rigs the game in advance. It is fundamentally unsound for the public at large. There is too much temptation to abuse.

We fought a war to free ourselves from aristocrats running the show. But it seems generations later we are more and more willing to return the power to them. We should as they say, "clean house and get some new blood"!

Check me on this if you would. Are there ANY real benefits to an arrangement like we have seen for the past many cycles? SHould we really continue down this road?

[leveymg]

1. There's nothing aristocratic about the Rodham family.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hillary_Rodham_Clinton

Hillary Diane Rodham was raised in a Methodist family in Park Ridge, Illinois. Her father, Hugh Ellsworth Rodham, a conservative, worked in the textile industry, and her mother, Dorothy Emma Howell Rodham, was a homemaker. As a child, Hillary was interested in sports, her church, and her school, a public school in Park Ridge. Prior to graduating from Maine South High School, she attended Maine East High School, where she served as class president, a member of the student council, a member of the debating team, and as a member of the National Honor Society. During her final year of high school (Maine South High School), she received the school's first social science award. Throughout her youth, Rodham was fond of sports, including tennis, skating, ballet, swimming, volleyball, and softball. She earned many awards as a Brownie and Girl Scout <1>. Hillary entered the world of politics in 1964, at the age of 16, by supporting the presidential bid of Arizona Republican Senator Barry Goldwater. Her parents encouraged her to pursue the career of her choice <2> <3>.

After completing high school in 1965, Rodham enrolled at Wellesley College in Massachusetts where she became active in politics, serving, for a time, as President of the Wellesley College Chapter of the College Republicans. During her junior year at Wellesley in 1968, Rodham was affected by the death of the civil rights leader, Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., whom she had met in person in 1962 <4>. After attending the Wellesley in Washington program at the urging of Professor Alan Schechter, her political views became more liberal and she joined the Democratic Party. Having been named valedictorian of her graduating class at Wellesley, Rodham graduated, in 1969, with departmental honors in Political Science. She became the first student in the history of Wellesley College to deliver a commencement address when she spoke at her own graduation <5>. Her speech received a standing ovation and she was featured in an article published by Life magazine <6>.

I think the phrase you're looking for is: "Down with the dynasties!"

[DistressedAmerican]

2. She's Come A Long Way Baby!

On edit: (Sorry the first reply was so short. the dog was giving me the eye.)

I felt I owed you more than that as that was a totally legit post. But it pretty much ignores my whole set of arguments. I am less concerned with economic roots here. I am talking about current election time wealth and power coupled with name recognition and family baggage (good or bad). They make elections about things other than what is best for the country.

[AZBlue]

20. So what you (and a lot of us) really need are ELECTION REFORMS!!!

Because right now the only way to get elected to a national and sometimes local position is to have a lot of money. This hits right on a topic I was just discussing this weekend and I'd like to do some research on: are there any "poor" Senators? How about Representatives? And, I'll even play along: by "poor" I mean a net worth of $100,000 or less at the time of their election? (If anyone has any info on this or links to a source, I'd love to hear it!).

Now, having said this, I also want to say that I caution against automatically assuming that because a person has money, they won't help those that don't. Especially if they came from a lower economic level than the one they are at now. Not everyone forgets where they come from and not everyone wants to get ahead just for their own personal gain. Some people actually want to help others, even when they themselves no longer need help. Not everyone is a Bush.

[DistressedAmerican]

21. Election Reforms Would Certainly Help As I Noted Below.

However, even with those reforms people from political families still have certain advantages that money can't buy.

As to the poor in politics. I admit they are a rare or non-existant breed. But, again I am more concerned witht the power in the family than dollars in hand. A familiar name is worth a hell of a lot of fundraising.

I also think that people that vote for the family members of other politicians are largely swayed by the family name and its implications. That is not a consideration that should factor in at that high a level.

[bahrbearian]

5. This explains a lot to me

"President of the Wellesley College Chapter of the College Republicans." I didn't know but it sure does show.

[hfojvt]

6. except you make Hugh Rodham sound like a textile worker

Hugh Rodham sought a better life than toiling in the Scranton coal mines, and attended Pennsylvania State University. He then began what was to prove to be a very successful career in the textile supply industry.

Raising his children in the affluent Chicago suburb

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hugh_Rodham

College graduates in the 1930s are hardly working class, and the "affluent" Chicago suburb does not sound like a working class neighborhood either. It sounds noveau rich.

[im10ashus]

3. n/t

:popcorn:

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

4. My objections to Hillary don't concern her wealth or celbrity.

Her voting for the deaths of thousands to advance her career does.

[DistressedAmerican]

7. Amended To Read "One Of My Problems". There Are Losts Of Other

issues I would not like ignore. But, of those far more in the George Column. Of course we have yet to see President Clinton II...

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

9. Hopefully both will be relegated to the obscurity the deserve.

The first by impeachment (fat chance considering the courage required to bring it about - sadly lacking in congress) and, the second by the voters of NY electing a progressive senator.

[meganmonkey]

8. Interesting point you make. A dynasty is a dynasty no matter how subtle

somehow in our American deMOCKracy we don't notice these things, but there is much power concentrated in the hands of so few, whether the power goes back generations (Bush) or not (Rodham/Clinton), this is a bad habit for our country.

I'm with ya, DA.

[leetrisck]

18. Wow - Bill & Hillary a dynasty doth make

wonder if they know that? The bushes breed like rabbits.

[Lefty48197]

10. Bill Clinton grew up dirt poor

then he became President. It's not as if he was born on third base like GWB was.

[DistressedAmerican]

11. See Post #2 and Insert "He" For "She"

Same points apply. Family baggage, current wealth, previous media exposure due to actions of other family members, accumulation of power in a very few hands.

[leetrisck]

12. Good grief! Don't use Hillary's name with bushes

what a disgrace. The Clinton's certainly didn't come from inherited wealth - shit - they couldn't afford crap until Clinton left office and started making speeches. This is plain silly.

[oasis]

13. Okay Distressed American, it's not perfect, what is your solution?

:shrug:

[DistressedAmerican]

14. We divest our collective Interest In Political Dynasties.

Just unhitch the national wagon.

[oasis]

19. There's no time to wait for another Abe Lincoln to just happen along.

If there is a person willing to run for office who will address most of the needs of the people, that person should get serious consideration for the office.

[Hobarticus]

15. Google "cost of senate campaign", and you'll get a reality check

In 1999, it was averaging $4.6 million. Can't imagine what it is these days. The days of Mr. Smith going to Washington are long gone.

So unless you weant to come up with totally free elections, then you'd better be prepared to endure many, many more 'aristocrats' in public office. Frankly, I find the notion of equating Bushes and Clintons ridiculous, based on money, but whatever.

[DistressedAmerican]

16. I Am In Favor (On Record Here Many Times) Of Public Financing Of Elections

Remove corporate donations all together. I am not in love with personal donations of a large size either. They should primarily be getting equal money from the collective tax till.

[Hobarticus]

17. You're right, but this would never happen in this lifetime...

Ideally you, me, and any other Joe Schmoe should be able to walk up and run for office.

[DistressedAmerican]

22. Kicker