The Clinton Dynasty and Why it Doesn't Move the Country Forward.

I've been thinking about the last Democratic debate and in particular Hillary Clinton's throw away answer about the Clinton dynasty question. She was asked by an email question how she could say she is about change when she would be apart of either a Bush or Clinton dynasty. Her response?

It did take a Clinton to clean (up) after the first Bush, and I think it might take a second one to clean up after the second Bush," she said to applause at a televised debate with Democratic rival Barack Obama, a senator from Illinois.

What an arrogant, self-righteous answer that only a Clinton could have the ability to clean up after George W. Bush. What an insult to all the Democrats who ran for the Dem nomination. Not only did her response not answer the question, it seemed to prove the point of the question!! Not to take anything away from Bill Clinton's presidency but the beauty of a Democracy is that new leaders appear every so many years to refresh the system, retool policies and develop new and bold ideas to respond to the changes of the new decades to come.

If we elect another Clinton, where does it end? After her is it Jeb Bush's turn and then Chelsea? It becomes an incestuous circle that keeps America stuck in the mud as two families use the American populace as pawns in their personal rivalries. It ceases to be about moving America forward and focuses more about fighting the last war over and over again. It's like the same two teams always playing in the Super Bowl that is the championship game in American football. After awhile you get sick of seeing the same game over and over. I know that change is difficult sometimes but as we Buddhist's say, "Change is inevitable." Let's move forward with confidence knowing that we Americans can do anything when inspired and moved to be apart of the solution and not of the problem by a charismatic, brilliant person such as Obama. In keeping with this vein of discussion I found these great quotes:

If Hillary Rodham Clinton serves two terms, then for 28 years the presidency will have been held by a Bush or a Clinton. By that point, about 40 percent of Americans would have lived their entire lives under a president from one of these two families.

Wouldn’t that make our democracy seem a little, er, Pakistani?

We Americans snicker patronizingly as “democratic” Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, Pakistan, Singapore, India and Argentina hand over power to a wife or child of a former leader. Yet I can’t find any example of even the most rinky-dink “democracy” confining power continuously for seven terms over 28 years to four people from two families. (And that’s not counting George H.W. Bush’s eight years as vice president.)

GOI: By the way, I saw on Meet the Press this morning that Clinton is behind McCain in the polls should they be the nominees but Obama is ahead of McCain. We Democrats and liberals need to look at ourselves in the mirror and if we want to live in the memories of the past or if we want to go with an electable candidate and finally win back the White House. Something to think long and hard about before Tuesday's mega primary day.

---End of Transmission---