With Congressman Patrick Kennedy of Rhode Island announcing his retirement the next Congress will not have a member of the Kennedy clan.
Subscribe to Rashtrakut by Email
Comments
No family in American history – not the Roosevelt, not the Adams, and certainly not the Bush families – have paid a higher price in the service of the people than the Kennedys. And to be perfectly honest with you, I’m sick and tired of listening to them get kicked around by the clueless right wing.
It was announced yesterday that Ben Quayle, son of the former vice-president, will be running for congress. We here, at this glorious moment in the history of our great nation, are proud and privileged to bear witness to the birth of the Quayle family political dynasty.
I need a drink.
http://www.tomdegan.blogspot.com
Tom Degan
Goshen, NY
I was going to run through a list of the candidates Quayle in AZ, Thurmond in SC and then decided against it. One slight comfort is that a dynastic name is not a total gimme. Ethan Hastert lost the primary earlier in the month for his father’s seat, Christie Todd Whitman’s 30 year old failed in her run for Congress etc. Quayle winning in AZ is no guarantee.
Tom’s post about Ben Q. was news to me as was Rashtrakut’s about Ethan Hastert. My view of dynastic politics is that it is repugnant but I’m not sure it’s any different now than it is ever been: John Adams, JQ Adams; Theodore Roosevelt, FDR.
I will quibble about the Roosevelts. Teddy and FDR were fifth cousins and in different parties. While FDR concisously tried to ape Teddy’s rise to power starting with Assistant Sec of the Navy (though he then tried of VP in 1920) and governor of NY, Teddy offered no dynastic support to FDR and was dead before FDR’s entry into national politics. But yes dynastic politics have been around for a while…lets not forget the regional dynasts, the Stevensons of Illinois, the Tafts of Ohio etc.
RSS Feed
