America's Royal Family

[ck4829]

The GOP Tickets since 1980.

1980
President: Ronald Reagan
VP: George H.W. Bush

1984
President: Ronald Reagan
VP: George H.W. Bush

1988
President: George H.W. Bush
VP: Dan Quayle

1992
President: George H.W. Bush
VP: Dan Quayle

1996
President: Bob Dole
VP: Jack Kemp

2000
President: George W. Bush
VP: Dick Cheney

2004
President: George W. Bush
VP: Dick Cheney

2008
Possible candidates include Jeb Bush.

The Republican Party is basically the Bush Party now.

Out of the last 26 years, there has been a Bush in the WH during 18 of them.

Anyone still doubt that the US has become an Oligarchy?

[DistressedAmerican]

1. And The Dems Belong To Clintons.

All aristocratic families need kicked to the curb. Not just the Bush's (although they may need it more than anyone else).

[ck4829]

3. I agree 100%

[mzteris]

4. um -

I don't think the Clinton's count as an "aristocratic family". Bill certainly did NOT come from a long line of $$ and power.

[DistressedAmerican]

8. Every Rich Family Gets Rich At Some Point.

She is an elitist. He background IS decidely upper crust. Bill's wasn't. But, they are both aristocrats now. So is their daughter. God forbid we see her come along for a run in ten or fifteen years.

[mzteris]

11. elitist?

Background "upper crust"?


from Wiki: ". . . Hillary Rodham was born in Chicago, Illinois, and was raised in a Methodist family in Park Ridge, Illinois. Her father, Hugh Ellsworth Rodham, a conservative, was an executive in the textile industry, and her mother, Dorothy Emma Howell Rodham, was a homemaker. She has two brothers, Hugh and Tony."


Doesn't sound "upper crust" to me......

[DistressedAmerican]

14. Regardless. They Are Filthy Rich And Insanely Powerful Now.

They have been for decades.

However, I do not see that how long they have had the big bucks has ANYTHING to do with the fact that their family has monopolized this party for the past decade and a half. This is mostly distraction to the real point, Clinton domination of the party.

Do you deny that they have?

[mzteris]

18. I happened to like Bill

The country was going pretty well with him at the helm.... what's your beef?

[DistressedAmerican]

20. I Have Made My Beef Clear.

This is not about my liking of disliking Bill. I do not recall stating my personal feelings about him at all. It is about how much power their family monopolizes and who loses out to that monopoloy. Feel free to reread my posts here if you are missing my point.

Wanna answer my question: Do you deny that the Clinton's have a disproportionate amount of influence in the party?

[mzteris]

26. I'm sorry -

I guess I'm outta the loop.

What inordinate power is it that the "Clinton's" are wielding, exactly?

Do I DENY that they have a disproportionate amount of influence in the party?

Well, let's just say that I am completely UNAWARE of this said "influence". Wanna clue me in on some particular examples? (With links, of course.)

[DistressedAmerican]

31. If You Are That Out Of The Loop, You Have Not Been On The Planet.

If you really do not get it, I suspect you never will as it has been underway for many years.

You will celarly never be convinced that the Clintons have a disproportionate amount of influence in the party regardless what links you demand (as if there are links that show who has how much power???). There is only one family that is even close in the influence or power in the party, the Kennedy's. If you are totally unaware of that fact, There is little more I can do to point it out. They have been pointing it out themselves for quite some time and it is clear as day to most.

I am curious why you seem to accept the proposition for the Bush's without reservation. But, if the same is pointed out about that Bill you like so much, it is rejected without reservation. That is all I need to see here.

Night.

[mzteris]

33. well - let's see

Bush family dynasty that stretches back how many generations?

Bills is like - uh - one?

$$$$$ - the Bushes clearly have WAY more.

The Clintons - business interests? Care to enumerate them for me?

The Bushes - oil, sugar, everything. Most especially - THE CARLYLE GROUP.


The Clintons - all "two" of them.

The Bushes - their numbers are legion.

[StClone]

23. What is insane

Is believing this self-made man and his wife as somehow Aristocratic. And power hungry? Bill is wanted and needed in the invertebrate Democratic party that has little other identity. Better Bill and Hill than nil.

[DistressedAmerican]

25. So Hillary's Pandering To The Middle Does Not Reflect Her Personal

ambition? Her BS on flag burning, and video games is not a move to further her political career. Her open support of Bush's war is not posturing to look tough on defense to bolster her run? Come on. Have you watched the woman? You call me insane? Please. Hell yes power hungry.

We do not need DNCers who sell the party out for their own jobs. Not at all. We need better nominees with the guts to stand for what is right. We need fresh blood that is not so attached to their power they refuse to take a tough political stnad on anything. Then we need to throw them out soon thereafter before their power corrupts them too.

[StClone]

28. Bill got elected

Catering to the middle and giving in to Corporations while in office so he could get elected to do good. Hillary wants to be Prez so she does what is politically expedient which has been one political modus operandi since forever. She isn't my first choice but I'd vote for her. If she is nominated I'm not staying home. Funny she is called a Liberal by Cons and a Centerist nut job by the some on the Left.

[DistressedAmerican]

29. And That Is Why She Is A Bad Nominee.

"Funny she is called a Liberal by Cons and a Centerist nut job by the some on the Left."

Neither side wants her. That should tell you something.

Pandering can get you elected. Bad pandering can get you rejected by all.

What is funny to me is how you assert all of these pure motives to her. Based on what? What I have watched is MY senator selling out my issues one after another for years now to set herself for an even better job. Get that? She has sold out liberals from day one. Why? Because of her good liberal core values? Right.

What you see as pure desire to do good, I see as pandering for more power.

[mzteris]

34. Lots of centrists want her

And even as a liberal leftie - I'd be happy with her.

[WCGreen]

36. They certainly are not filthy rich...

Maybe smudggy rich...

Butnot filthy rich....

[flordehinojos]

12. neither did Hillary.

and I think I read somewhere that at some point someone in her family whether in her grandmother's generation, or her own mother's generation, someone took up sewing (seamtress) to help support the family.

[Blue Belle]

17. More Kennedy's have held office than Clintons... n/t

[DistressedAmerican]

19. They Should Go Too.

THey have traded on the family name far too long. They have held an unreasonably disproportionate amount of power in the country for decades. It is not even remotely the ideal in a democracy where we all theoretically have a shot at the big chair. We all know that is not true however, because the rich and powerful keep pertetuating their control (with our willing assistance no less). That goes for Bush's, Clinton's and Kennedy's.

However, the OP referred to the recent presidential election cycles. Bill was in two of them and Hillary is getting ready to make it a third for their rich and powerful family.

[brmdp3123]

22. Or maybe the Kennedys, though their day may have passed.

[RandomKoolzip]

27. Bill was president eight years.

So two terms as president constitues "royalty" now?

[mzteris]

2. That's 'cause they're so good at being

SHILLS.

[JohnnyLib2]

5. Long live the queen

Hell, I'll take Elizabeth Rex and her brood in '08. And never has that thought come before!

[Benhurst]

24. Elizabeth Regina.

If we're going to be reduced to monarchists, we should use the correct titles.

(Rex: king, Regina: queen) :rofl:

:hi:

[JohnnyLib2]

30. Thanks for the correction,

but my Irish relatives may disown me anyway for this line of thought!

[devilgrrl]

6. but but but but what about the Kennedy's?

:sarcasm:

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

10. Same goes for them, too.

It's ridiculous to assume someone deserves to be president just because his/her parent, sibling, spouse or other relative had the job. But people will vote for a presidential relative for reasons I just don't understand. When Little Boooosh was running the first time, I heard a lot of people say they'd vote for him because they liked his Dad. WTF?? I am absolutely against political dynasties -- Bushes, Clintons, Kennedys, anybody. It's just that the Bushes are particularly awful.

[DistressedAmerican]

21. Absolutely!

Undemocratic to have that much power bound up in individual families.

[NJCher]

7. I get so sick of posters calling these people royalty

They are not royalty. They are sell-outs, thugs, thieves. They are a front for corporate interests. They are not even bright enough to machinate for themselves, which is why they have been called upon to be puppets so many times. Yes, indeed, there is a demand for a dependable front man, just dumb enough to enjoy the role but not to ask for any real power.

Call them what they are and do not dignify them with terms like "royalty" or "aristocracy."




Cher

[DistressedAmerican]

9. I Find Both Of Those Terms To Be Insults.

Not compliments.

Aristocartic royals are known for their selling out, their thugs and their thieves.

When have they ever acted differently?

[wakeme2008]

13. IMHO King George will have a hard time leaving the WH

He has live the Royal Plus life for eight years when he leaves. The will no longer be 24 hour chiefs on call. No more AF1 to take him places. And the security will be nowhere like it is today.

King George flys his own food stuff and chiefs to every place he visits. Do not think he will be paying for that type service once out of office.

[Cleita]

16. Not only that people will find out about all that bad things he

has done that we don't even know about yet. They can't leave because there is too much criminal activity to cover up. Watch for really desperate acts to keep power in 2008.

[Dont_Bogart_the_Pretzel]

32. When /if he leaves...

can you imagine the CEO bonus he'll get?

[Cleita]

15. And did we have to get the dumbest ones in the country?

:eyes:

[rustydog]

35. EEWWW, the evil of inbreeding raises its ugly head

Hi, Ihm Jebbie, the Prezdent! This is my brother and father Geeeeorge and his Father Geeeorge, my grandpa.
Yep they both banged the same woman who happens to be grandpa's mom!