Where was the "dynasty" talk in 2004 ??

[kentuck]

By 2004, Bill Clinton had served 8 years and George W Bush was running for his second term. His father, Bush Sr, had ran two times as VP with Ronald Reagan and served one term as President. For twelve years he was on the Republican ticket for the Presidency and Vice-Presidency. In 2004, his idiot son was trying to add 8 more years to the Bush legacy. And not one word of "dynasty". But when Hillary announces she is going to run, everyone has a problem that the Clintons are trying to extend their 8-year dynasty?? Even if she won two terms in the White House, the Clintons would still be behind the Bushes in dynasty years. So why even discuss it now?

[forsberg]

1. because the Rove successfully sold Dumya...

As both a fundie and a moderate "compassionate conservative", and not a moderate blue blood like his pops.

[lvx35]

2. The Bush dynasty was sort of experimental

Would the son of a president be a better leader? The answer turned out to be "NO", and people are against the whole idea now.

But its nothing new. What was FDR in for, 4 terms? Maybe if the Clintons can come across as FDRs in this race, or if people got the idea that a Clinton sequel will be as good as a Bush sequel was bad, they can turn it around.

[jakem]

3. unfortunately, with the exception of Evil Dead...

sequels generally suck.

[lvx35]

6. LOL! Its true, but the fact is we are in a culture of sequels and remakes.

I mean ANY freakin' show you can think of from our childhood. Incredible Hulk, dukes of Hazard, batman, etc. Has been made into a remake. I would love it if our culture were moving away from this, but I'm not sure we are yet.

[SoCalDem]

4. Incumbents usually run for re-election

there WAS talk of the dynasty thing in 2K..:)

[WI_DEM]

5. Some a-hole the other day on C-span called the Dems the "nepotism party" over and over

and nobody called him on it! I wanted to say, um, what about the Bush's????? and what about Romney???? but this yahoo called in while Gov Culver of Iowa was the guest and said, "you are a direct beneficiary of the nepotism party" because his father had been US Senator from Iowa. What a asshole.

[tom_paine]

7. LOL. You know where, kentuck. Not permitted to be disussed like so many other topics.

Even having gazed at it and studied it these last sevene years, I must admit it is a tribute to the inventiveness of totalitarians, as well as the massively powerful institutions of marketing, advertising, PR, psychology and fusing them all together into gleichschaltung that we get this amazing uniformity of self-sensorship, as if Bushies had guns pointed to the backs of people's heads watching them write every word.

Just like the million things which are not to be discussed, from Murderin' Joe Scarborough's dead intern, poor Lori Klausutis to the Bush Family's intimate relationships with Nazis past and present from the early 30s

http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/history/document/document_20070723.shtml

to the HW Bush campaign in the late 80s

http://www.rense.com/general17/bushhitler.htm

Whatever the nuts-and-bolts of how it works day-to-day, which we can never know, it works. Those things which are forbidden to be discussed, don't get discussed...not at least where large numbers of people will see them.

[UTUSN]

8. That's the answer to the wingnuts saying Sen.C would be nowhere without Bill

Where would idiot Shrub be without Poppy?!1