Bush, Clinton, Bush ... Clinton?
WASHINGTON (Yahoo News) - Forty percent of Americans have never lived when there wasn't a Bush or a Clinton in the White House. Anyone got a problem with that?
With Hillary Rodham Clinton hoping to tack another four or eight "Clinton" years on to the Bush-Clinton-Bush presidential pattern that already has held sway for two decades, talk of Bush-Clinton fatigue is increasingly cropping up in the national political debate.
With Hillary Rodham Clinton hoping to tack another four or eight "Clinton" years on to the Bush-Clinton-Bush presidential pattern that already has held sway for two decades, talk of Bush-Clinton fatigue is increasingly cropping up in the national political debate.
posted by BP News Bureau | 12:21 PM
1 Comments:
Can you say oligarchy?
A lot of people are under the mistaken impression that the Soviet Union was either a socialist democracy or a totalitarian dictatorship, depending on where they line up along the political left-to-right spectrum. The truth is in between.
The Soviet Union had an executive and legislative branch. Members of each were democratically elected. They also had a more or less independent judiciary. Sound familiar?
The truth in the Soviet Union was that the country was run by a small group of old men and women who were called the Politburo. Membership was dynastic and they were all of a privileged class that wasn't supposed to exist in the "classless" society of a socialist state. If this doesn't still sound familiar, it should.
The truth in the United States is that the country is run by an oligarchy consisting of the leadership of the two factions of our single political party. In form it is different than the Politburo, in function it is not. That the dynastic nature of the American Politburo would leak out in the form of two names occupying the forefront of executive leadership for a generation or more should be surprising to no one.
Post a Comment
<< Home