Political "dynasties" have NOTHING to do with real world, national needs.

[wcepler]

Jeez, what is this, France in the Middle Ages? It's bad enough that Hollywood keeps recycling no talent children of famous actors and actresses, but dear God, this shouldn't be happening with the American PRESIDENCY!

OK, so Hillary Clinton is the wife of Bill Clinton. And that means precisely what that's good? Does it mean Mrs. Clinton should "automatically" be considered as a candidate for president? Duh.

Let's face it, if the Clinton's and Bush's (bed mates in this respect) had their way, eventually they would be running their dogs and cats for Congress!

Political platform? Well, this cat is the mouser of your dreams; or this dog can catch frisbee's like you wouldn't believe.

Hey, maybe Hillary can catch frisbee's too! Or Jeb Bush (when the pugs will still lunatic enough to consider running him for president), can . . . what? Who cares, he's the BROTHER of G. W. Bush. Isn't that enough?

It seems to be in America. Man that political sibling or son and daughter action is fierce is our country. Just be a RELATIVE (or spouse) and you're already 2/3 elected.

However, Mrs. Clinton to millions of us is just that: Mrs. Clinton. Nothing wrong with that. It's cool, she's the wife of a former president, but does that mean she has a leg up on everyone else?

Bottom line, all this "keep it in the family crap" is just American "royalty". Isn't it? When you get positions of limitless power simply because you're related to someone, that's royalty.

Hell, why is "Prince Charles", Prince Charles? Because of something wonderful and creative he did? I think not. He's Prince Charles for the same reason Saudi billionaire princes are Saudi billionaire princes. It's just family stuff and it means absolutely, absolutely nothing. The only thing Prince Charles ever did to "earn" his title was to come out of the right womb.

Now maybe this is a little tricky to talk about, but in your heart of hearts, do you think Hillary didn't dump Bill out of "love". Well, who knows? That's a private limbo, but THIS WE DO KNOW. She wouldn't have had a change in h___ to be elected to ANY political office if she had had a traumatic and toxic divorce from good ‘ol Bill.

In short, staying married was the "politically correct" thing for her to do, and boy this woman never does ANYTHING that's not 100% politically correct -- indeed, that's why so many progressives and liberals hold her in limitless contempt, since this is the time to be taking moral/rational stands about "something" -- anything!

But not Hillary. She's Mrs. former President Bill Clinton and (exactly like her husband), she plays the political game to the max. Forget, Iraq, forget tax breaks for the vampire rich, forget the Texas Oil company rape of Mother Nature -- basically, forget EVERYTHING and just be DLC "politically correct". When it comes to substantive political issues, she's practically invisible!

EXCEPT for the fact that she's Mrs. Bill Clinton.

Who cares?
**********************************************************************
W. Christopher Epler (Bill)

<http://theliberationofrealism.blogspot.com/>

[LSparkle]

1. I reject political dynasties for the same reason I think the Estate Tax is OK

Each person should WORK for themselves -- no huge inherited wealth and no political dynasties. I thought that was what was DIFFERENT about the United States -- that ANYONE can work their way up in this country, that who your parents were SHOULDN'T give you a leg up or keep you from achieving your dreams.

[water]

2. Now wait a second...

...if people should "WORK for themselves", shouldn't they also be allowed to choose where to spend/give their own money? What gives you the right to take it from them?

[Demblue4life]

3. Breaking news: the Clintons don't put a gun to people's heads to get their vote

this is a democracy. The ancient dynasties you seek to compare the Clintons and Bushes to, were forced on the people.
If Americans want to vote for another person, there is Obama, Romney, McCain, etc.

In the Bushes' cases it gets complicated, because they steal elections.

But when it comes to the Clintons, there are primaries and general elections that people can use to defeat them..

Besides, what if these candidates who share the same last name are GOOD CANDIDATES?