Michael Hogan Posted October 23, 2007 Share Posted October 23, 2007 Dynastic Voyage by Hendrik Hertzberg The New Yorker October 29, 2007 Shortly after Hillary Rodham Clinton declared her candidacy for President last winter, Roger Cohen, writing in the International Herald Tribune, declared that “a delicate problem confronts her that few people are talking about: almost two decades of dynastic domination of American politics.” Well, they’re talking about it now. “Forty per cent of Americans have never lived when there wasn’t a Bush or a Clinton in the White House,” a recent Associated Press story, by Nancy Benac, begins. “Talk of Bush-Clinton fatigue is increasingly cropping up in the national political debate,” Benac goes on. “If Hillary Clinton were to be elected and reëlected, the nation could go twenty-eight years in a row with the same two families governing the country. Add the elder Bush’s terms as Vice-President, and that would be thirty-six years straight with a Bush or Clinton in the White House.” And a cover story in the Economist a couple of weeks ago, while noting that a woman President “would undoubtedly be a good thing for the country,” adds, ominously, “But there is a downside: dynasty.....” Full story: http://www.newyorker.com/talk/comment/2007..._talk_hertzberg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charles Drago Posted October 23, 2007 Share Posted October 23, 2007 “But there is a downside: dynasty.....”[/indent] Or, in the cases of Bushes and Clintons ... travesty. Charles Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now