Public interest in the First Family has always been a bit of a high wire act -First Children especially. We seem to see them as quasi-public figures, while their parents have been protective of their privacy, especially from a particularly invasive and at times, cruel, media.

With that tension in mind, T.A. Frank’s article on Jenna Bush and Chelsea Clinton in The New Republic was fascinating. Frank doesn’t walk the tightrope very carefully, though; he argues that Jenna has, of late, done a better job of promoting her “family brand” than her Clinton counterpart.

Jenna appears to have outgrown her proclivity for alcohol and the occasional “butt dancing“, and with her teaching job, UNICEF volunteer work, and new novel, emerged as something of a humanitarian, while Chelsea is raking in six figures as a hedge fund manager  and chillin’ with pseudo-celebrities.

Frank concludes, “Don’t get me wrong: When it’s Jenna versus Chelsea for the presidency in a few years, I’ll still pull the lever for the smart liberal.”

If American politics devolves to the point we’re forced to choose between another Bush and another Clinton, based on what they appear to value now, I’d be supporting, for the first time in my life, a Bush.