Posted on 12/26/2014 8:12:00 PM PST by SeekAndFind
In mid-December, Jeb Bush announced his intention to explore a presidential bid. If he runs and wins the Republican nomination and then the election, he will be the third President Bush in 25 years. That unprecedented prospect has left many wondering: In a republic like ours, is it proper for one family to fill the executive seat so often?
The Bushes are not the first family to send multiple members to the White House. They join the Adamses (father John and son John Quincy), the Harrisons (grandfather William Henry and grandson Benjamin), and the Roosevelts (cousins Theodore and Franklin). But the Bushes are in a class by themselves for the speed with which one succeeded another—just eight years apart. And if the third Bush wins the top job after another interval of eight years, that will only make the exception more pronounced.
While we might fret about this for cultural reasons, we must acknowledge that it has not come about by accident. In fact, dynasties make a lot of sense for practical politicians. Acquiring the presidency is enormously challenging, and political dynasties ease at least some of the difficulties either in securing the nomination or in winning the general election. To put it bluntly, dynasties endure because they are politically useful.
Not surprisingly, then, political dynasties have actually been quite common in American history, though not always family-based. From the early 19th century into the 20th, there were three state-based political dynasties that were even more dominant than the Bushes.
The Virginia dynasty dominated the presidency for the first quarter of the nineteenth century. President Thomas Jefferson (1801-09) was succeeded by James Madison (1809-17), then James Monroe (1817-25). Strictly on merit, Jefferson’s and Madison’s elections were eminently sensible—but Monroe’s less so.
(Excerpt) Read more at weeklystandard.com ...
Or else he just got the word from his biz partner Bush that their latest load of Cocaine coming in from South America is on time and will land at the Mena Arkansas airport as scheduled. Distribution to begin asap.......as always.
Billy Beer....(Remember that?!)
LOL!! I forgot about the ‘sidewinder’ job he is supposedly packin’ around!
Yes, they are useful to themselves - but not to the people. Otherwise we'd better drop the charade of elections and representatives and just have a monarch. But we don't want a monarch and we don't want a dynasty for the same reason: the ruler in those schemes is not chosen for his exceptional personal qualities; he is chosen only because he is a fortunate son.
Great catch! How different things would be if he had been able to whip LBJ in ‘64 huh? Or I at least like to think things would be different.....but nobody will ever know of course.
How about one of the Duck Dynasty guys?
I would have a very difficult time voting for Jeb Bush.
I feel the same way. We were far better off with Bush after 9/11 than we would have been with Gore.
But Jeb Bush is much less conservative and I think he also falls into a spoiled child entitlement syndrome.
It is really not the name and how many there are but just about their philosophies and character.
Look at Clinton’s eyes. He’s stoned.
“he looks like such a goober”
There’s a good reason for that...
“He looks like such a goober”
“There’s a good reason for that”
Why? ... Because he is one.
No more big government one world liberal Rinos please. It is hard not to like the Bush people but enough please
You will never be voting FOR a candidate.
1. You always vote against the candidate you think will do the most damage.
2. Deciding to not vote against the more dangerous candidate by not voting at all ensures the more dangerous candidate wins.
3. Vote into office who will veto bills (stop) a runaway evil congress or one that one that won't stop (sign bills) a congress that speaks FOR the people and the Constitution.
Sux but that's how the game is set up. That's why 3rd party candidates are touted to split the votes for the more powerful candidate on both sides. They know idealists will vote for the 3rd party candidate. Which means Satan wins and the demon possessed one loses. This is what is meant by the lesser of 2 evils.
——1. You always vote against the candidate you think will do the most damage.-——
1. You will always vote against the candidate that does not rexhibit your vision of Christ like conservative purity
Recall, George “read my lips” Bush, begot Clinton, and George W.(” my brother from another mother”) re. to Bill Clinton begot Obama. One thing Jesse Jackson got right was when he said “out da Bush’s”.
Bottom line Jeb, with all his money and family’s support, will not get the nomination.
I don’t hear a word about the Kennedy Dynasty.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.