Everybody is talking about Barack Obama using Whitewater and the cattle futures scandals to hurt Hillary Clinton. I happen to think the Bosnia LIE, Bill Clinton's LIE’s during this campaign, Hillary's NAFTA LIES and Mark Penn’s Columbia/Hillary campaign issue - would do a greater damage to them.
Do you remember the 90's when Bill Clinton was riding high in the oval office, the economy was booming, and the "socialist liberal Hillary Clinton, then the First Lady had suffered a terrible defeat in her attmpt to reform health care? Oh the rantings and ravings of Rush Limbaugh, William Kristol, Pat Buchanan and the rest on how she was Karl Marx and Lenin with a dusting of Mussolini for good measure trying socialize America. It was here she earned her bona fides. Everyone left of center thought she had been smeared, outragiously attacked and women's groups often howled that she should be America's first woman President, while the Newt Gingrichs screamed that that was her ultimate goal and oopenly raised alarm at her personal ambitions and virtually made had her nominated then.
Well a funny thing happened along the way to the forum........
The 22nd Amendment, limiting the service of a United States President to two elected terms, was ratified by the States and amended to the United States Constitution in February of 1951.
Traditionally, following the lead of Presidents Washington, Jefferson, Madison and Monroe, American Presidents had limited themselves two terms in office by choice. There was one exception to this tradition. From 1932-1945, President Franklin Delano Roosevelt served as President of the United Sates, in the process winning election to the presidency no less than four times. He was and is one of our most beloved presidents.
However, six short years after his death, the people of the United States amended our Constitution to prevent future presidents from serving more than two terms.
There were and are sound reasons for American citizens to do this in 1951 and those reasons are relevant to our nation in 2008...
A second argument why Hillary, as the wife of a recent president, should not be running for president. (The first was made in comments). I have never argued that she should be barred from the race. That's silly. Ethically and practically, however, there are excellent reasons abandon support for a candidate who derives any political power from family connections.
I've heard and read people say that to argue against Hillary Clinton based on the dynasty argument is sexist. Was it sexist when we rejected George W. Bush's presidential dynasty when we did it in 2000, or 2004?
A branch of the National Organization for Women recently accused Senator Kennedy of "the greatest betrayal!". They say "He’s joined the list of progressive white men who can’t or won’t handle the prospect of a woman president who is Hillary Clinton (they will of course say they support a woman president, just not "this" one)".
I am a progressive white male but I totally disagree ...
Obama won a crushing defeat today, with about 2x the votes of Clinton. For me and my friends at Uni, this is a message of hope. We've been talking about something I don't see much of in the news and I don't see much in Obama's campaign that needs to be addressed: the issue of Dynasty.
Dynasties are dangerous. When the second Bush came in power after 8 years of Clinton, he brought with him nearly the same people as his father had: Powell, Rumsfeld, Rove, Cheney, and more. That obviously turned out terribly. Now, it is well known that power corrupts, and I believe there is no more corruptible position than government. It is just plain dangerous to keep any one person in a position of power for too long, no matter how great. In today's political world, it is just simply to easy to give and receive favors, all at the expense of the common person. We know this through years here at DKos - self-serving politicians hurt everyone but themselves and big business.
Take a moment to view the following Citizen-produced web ad:
For 27 years, the American people have been represented in the White House by two political families. The Bush family, which has occupied the seat of power for a majority of those years, and the Clinton family, which spent 8 years there and is seeking 8 more.
Of course experience is necessary when it comes to picking our nominee. But considering how often she brings it up, you'd think there was a glaring difference in the sheer amount of experience between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. If we look simply at their time in office however we see that she doesn't enjoy any great advantage in this regard at all. She has one more term in the Senate than he does but he's spent more time as a legislator over all.
One of the arguments often put forth, as a basic reason for not backing HIllary Clinton, is this so-called dynasty issue. That George Bush is the son of his father, and that Hillary is the wife of her husband. On examination I believe this argument does not hold up.
For more on this shocking development, follow me down down down down down... I'll even throw in a real catfight that'll make the much-hyped CNN "(garden)SLUGFEST Slugfest slugfest" look like... the walk in the park that it pretty much was.
Is it inevitable? If Hillary wins the primary, and wins the general, and then gets reelected, will the pendulum swing far enough that the only realistic candidate the next time around will be Jeb Bush?
The Clintons and George H. W. Bush see themselves as "practically family". "When it comes to the first President Bush, both Clintons appear to have a soft spot, and the feeling seems mutual."
Mr. Bush and Mr. Clinton have come to consider each other to be practically family, people close to them say, spending time together golfing, boating and kibitzing about foreign policy. And Mr. Bush is fond of Mrs. Clinton, his friends say: Not only does he like strong women, but he enjoys her sarcastic sense of humor, her quick way with a zinger and her shared interest in the nitty-gritty of international affairs.
Okay, yes both George H. W. Bush and Bill Clinton were successive presidents, and yes former presidents are members to a very exclusive club, but friendships rarely form between former presidents.
