THIS STORY HAS BEEN FORMATTED FOR EASY PRINTING
‘PRESIDENT BUSH’? — A CERTAIN RING TO IT

Why not Jeb? Because we’ve had our fill of dynasties

July 27, 2010

E-mail this article

Invalid E-mail address
Invalid E-mail address

Sending your article

Your article has been sent.

Text size +

REGARDING JOSHUA Green’s notion of Jeb Bush for president (“Why not Jeb Bush?’’ Op-ed, July 22): George H. W. Bush was a fairly good president and obviously George W. Bush was our worst president. I’m willing to overlook both those facts and give Jeb a look. However, I’m strongly inclined not to vote for him for a reason that has nothing to do with his brother’s gross incompetence or his father’s workmanlike competence. Do we really want to go down the road of the dynastic politics of India, Pakistan, and other Second and Third World nations? Will we all find ourselves holding our breaths, waiting to see whether Chelsea Clinton or either of George W.’s twins or the next generation of Kennedys go into politics?

Alexis de Tocqueville talks about this tendency, that the people come to see the family name as something like the name of a band — to put it in modern, non-Tocquevillean terms. Our 43d president taught us the folly of such thinking.

Let’s all take the pledge and resolve not to vote for any Bush, Kennedy, or Clinton (other than maybe Hillary, the accent on Rodham). Then again, maybe I’ll just change my name to Roosevelt Clinton Kennedy.

Michael Christian Haverhill

More opinions

Find the latest columns from: