Béni_Etre
04-12-2004, 07:43 PM
It is said that the Kennedys were and are the most powerful family in polictics. In the next few years Kathleen Kennedy, her brother-in-law Andrew Cuomo, and her cousin Mark Schriver are all planned to run in an area of politics. But will the Bushes become the new Family?
The Bush family is slowly gaining family memebers in powerful political positions while the Kennedys, while meaning no offense, are dying like flies. This could be associated with the Kennedy curse, whatever your choosing. But the Bush family while only consisting of a handful of powerful memebers may later be quite a force to be reconed with in later years of this countries political state.
With the decreasing interest with politics in the public eye we choose president and political representatives by something more recognizable. Brand Names! Which is why we have a Bush running the White House.
And as Bush is proving, picking our presidents based on pedigree isn’t such a good idea. Not that we should be surprised: Andy Hiller of WHDH-TV (Channel 7) showed us what we were in for back in November 1999, when he ambushed Bush by asking the Texan to name the heads of state of Chechnya, Taiwan, India, and Pakistan. Bush answered the question about Taiwan this way: “Yeah, Lee.” And he alluded to, but did not name, “the new Pakistani general — just been elected — he’s not been elected.” The stunt showed that the fortuitously named candidate had, at best, a faulty grasp of global issues.
So my questions for this is...
1.) Do you see the Bushes becoming more powerful then the Kennedys?
~and~
2.) Do you think that presidents should be allowed to be chosen mainly because of "Brand names"?
*Thanks to tragediaolvidada_R.I .P._R.S.*
The Bush family is slowly gaining family memebers in powerful political positions while the Kennedys, while meaning no offense, are dying like flies. This could be associated with the Kennedy curse, whatever your choosing. But the Bush family while only consisting of a handful of powerful memebers may later be quite a force to be reconed with in later years of this countries political state.
With the decreasing interest with politics in the public eye we choose president and political representatives by something more recognizable. Brand Names! Which is why we have a Bush running the White House.
And as Bush is proving, picking our presidents based on pedigree isn’t such a good idea. Not that we should be surprised: Andy Hiller of WHDH-TV (Channel 7) showed us what we were in for back in November 1999, when he ambushed Bush by asking the Texan to name the heads of state of Chechnya, Taiwan, India, and Pakistan. Bush answered the question about Taiwan this way: “Yeah, Lee.” And he alluded to, but did not name, “the new Pakistani general — just been elected — he’s not been elected.” The stunt showed that the fortuitously named candidate had, at best, a faulty grasp of global issues.
So my questions for this is...
1.) Do you see the Bushes becoming more powerful then the Kennedys?
~and~
2.) Do you think that presidents should be allowed to be chosen mainly because of "Brand names"?
*Thanks to tragediaolvidada_R.I .P._R.S.*