Sunday, October 28, 2007

And The Difference Is?

Just a short one today.

A couple of days ago I ran into a women I used to work with. She is very liberal, and she and I used to have some wonderful debates when we worked together, so I made sure to tell her about my blog.

Throughout the course of small talk we got around to politics, and she started blasting Bush. "He should have never been elected President. The only reason he did was because of his father. He was elected solely based on his name."

I asked her who she planned on voting for in the next election, and she quickly responded "Hillary Clinton". I was still laughing as she walked away, but I don't think she ever got the joke.

2 comments:

cwilcox said...

Yeah, if nothing else we should have learned the lesson that once someone has served in the White House the rest of their family is banned from ever serving in the same office. Maybe that could become law and the true legacy of Gee Double-ya.

Iowa Bob said...

My point wasn't that A presidents relatives should be banned from the White House. My friend commented on the fact that if Dubya's dad hadn't been President, no one would have even considered him. My point is that if Hillary's husband hadn't been president, no one would have ever considered her for President, let alone Senator.