You have the rather vacuous claim by the GOP that Hillary Clinton is the one with too much family baggage. Sure. I mean after all if this race becomes one defined as a choice between Bill Clinton and George W. Bush then guess who has more to lose? Oh wait.
The idea that the GOP can hit Hillary as being part of a 'political dynasty' is the penultimate example of pot-kettle. After all, Jeb Bush is the odds on favorite. The idea that the Clintons are a dynasty quite in the same way as the Bushes are is already badly mistaken.
As others have pointed out, there is a significant difference between being born into a kind of American aristocracy as Jeb was-where his lineage goes back to the Mayflower and Queen Elizabeth is a first cousin and your father and brother were both President and your grandfather was a very powerful Senator and Hillary Clinton marries a man who later on became President.
The Clintons story is actually a recognizably American one of meritocratic social mobility. He was born quite poor, she was from the typical middle class family that many of us recognize and the two of them linked by both love and a shared idealism have gone up the ladder as it were.
That's the American Dream. Compare this with Bush who 'didn't hit a triple but was just born on third base.'
The Clintons aren't really a 'dynasty' in quite the same way. Theirs is a meritocratic story, the Bushes is an aristocratic one-it's not exactly the American Dream but more in line with the old European Dream of being born into the Habsburg Monarchy.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Habsburg_Monarchy
That's who the Bushes are: our answer to the Habsburgs.
Bill and Hillary on the other hand, hit the triple.
Coming into this election it's obvious how to hit Jeb's big glass jaw. It's his name. When his big brother ran in 2000 it was a distinct blessing as W's polls soared at the positive association. However, he managed to totally wreck the goodwill associated with the Bush name through his disastrous Presidency.
There's no way Jeb avoids this negative association which is like an anchor around his leg. The great news for Hillary: he's not even trying. He's decided that the best way to handle it is with a full throated endorsement of his brother and his failed Iraq policy
"I'm my own man." With that declaration of independence, Jeb Bush sought to distance himself from the disastrous presidency of his big brother. The same day he made that statement, though, he listed his foreign policy advisers. The list had 21 names. Seventeen of them had been advisers to George W. Bush, according to The Washington Post."
The idea that the GOP can hit Hillary as being part of a 'political dynasty' is the penultimate example of pot-kettle. After all, Jeb Bush is the odds on favorite. The idea that the Clintons are a dynasty quite in the same way as the Bushes are is already badly mistaken.
As others have pointed out, there is a significant difference between being born into a kind of American aristocracy as Jeb was-where his lineage goes back to the Mayflower and Queen Elizabeth is a first cousin and your father and brother were both President and your grandfather was a very powerful Senator and Hillary Clinton marries a man who later on became President.
The Clintons story is actually a recognizably American one of meritocratic social mobility. He was born quite poor, she was from the typical middle class family that many of us recognize and the two of them linked by both love and a shared idealism have gone up the ladder as it were.
That's the American Dream. Compare this with Bush who 'didn't hit a triple but was just born on third base.'
The Clintons aren't really a 'dynasty' in quite the same way. Theirs is a meritocratic story, the Bushes is an aristocratic one-it's not exactly the American Dream but more in line with the old European Dream of being born into the Habsburg Monarchy.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Habsburg_Monarchy
That's who the Bushes are: our answer to the Habsburgs.
Bill and Hillary on the other hand, hit the triple.
Coming into this election it's obvious how to hit Jeb's big glass jaw. It's his name. When his big brother ran in 2000 it was a distinct blessing as W's polls soared at the positive association. However, he managed to totally wreck the goodwill associated with the Bush name through his disastrous Presidency.
There's no way Jeb avoids this negative association which is like an anchor around his leg. The great news for Hillary: he's not even trying. He's decided that the best way to handle it is with a full throated endorsement of his brother and his failed Iraq policy
"I'm my own man." With that declaration of independence, Jeb Bush sought to distance himself from the disastrous presidency of his big brother. The same day he made that statement, though, he listed his foreign policy advisers. The list had 21 names. Seventeen of them had been advisers to George W. Bush, according to The Washington Post."
"Then, speaking at an off-the-record event in Manhattan last week, Jeb Bush said, "What you need to know is that who I listen to when I need advice on the Middle East is George W. Bush."
"John Ellis Bush seems hellbent on reprising his brother's debacles. Call him Jeb W. Bush. What's next -- Dick Cheney as veep? A dog named Barney? A "Mission Accomplished" banner?
http://www.cnn.com/2015/05/13/opinions/begala-jeb-w-bush/
Truly taking candy from a baby. I think the reason for this is what Krugman identifies:
Jeb and his family, like everyone else in the today's GOP, refuses to learn anything.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/15/opinion/paul-krugman-fraternity-of-failure.html
Someone recently compared the difference between conservatives and progressives-I prefer the word liberal to progressive but that's just me. The big difference is that conservatives don't like to ever admit to mistakes of any kind.
Conservatism is the belief that our fathers knew more than us-and theirs more than them. It's a kind of belief in Platonic decay where we are ever deviating more from the originally prefect Forms.
While progressives believe in progress-so there's no shame in admitting you were wrong on a particular issue and that you've changed your mind-conservatives find doing so anathema. So when elections don't go their way it's just the liberal media's fault or maybe the candidate failed to stand out and puff out his chest enough as a 'real conservative'-the No True Scotsman Syndrome.
Pretending that-like it or not-societal doesn't evolution happen is a suicidal way to go about your business. Which shows in the way Jeb is speaking about his brother.
On a human level you can understand: he loves his brother and is hurt by how his brother is treated publicly. However is he running for President or trying to correct the record on his brother? If he's trying to do both then his election is going to be a Kamikaze mission.
Here I can't improve on Paul Begala:
"These are not gaffes. They are sincere statements of belief, and we should take them as such. Even at this early stage of the 2016 campaign it is clear: Jeb Bush would take America back to the policies of his brother. He seeks a restoration of the presidency of George W. Bush."
"To be sure, familial loyalty is a good thing. But many Americans -- including the author of this column -- think George W. Bush was the worst president of their lifetime. The notion of repeating his reign of error is terrifying to us. I'm sure the Ford family all loved the son of the family patriarch, Henry. But they're too smart to bring back the Edsel."
http://www.cnn.com/2015/05/13/opinions/begala-jeb-w-bush/
No comments:
Post a Comment