The Kennedy's (how ever much we love them) are the farthest thing from Royalty. They were nothing more than Irish bandits; charismatic yes, but bandits none the less.
American aristocracy is not hard to find, but we must go back to English colonial times; anything later would be "trop nouveau". Plenty of land owners in America had "blue blood". But that's not enough. To be American "royally" ones family must have been integral in the formation of the nation.
Scratch the Dutch off the list, they may have been rich but they were mere merchants.
Try the Lees of Virginia. The Lee family is spawned in "blue" blood", two of their sons signed the Declaration of Independence (the only family to claim such an honor), there are over one million descendants of the family in the US, many Presidents have Lee ancestors, and they can trace there linage to Charlemagne!
2006-12-19 15:50:18
·
answer #1
·
answered by stupidity_of_pride 4
·
1⤊
0⤋
With the Kennedy's they came at a time when America was struggling with itself over civil rights. Not to mention that John Kennedy was a World War 2 hero.(Check out the movie"PT 109") He saved a man by swimming with him on his back to an island close by, when their boat was sank. Jackie was a beautiful woman, with grace and style. The 2 children were always dressed and well behaved. He was a young President and that's what America needed at the time, kind of like a fresh start. I think America fell in love with the image of the family, rather then what they really were. And this family has had more then it's fair share of tragedies. But not one family really stands out as "Royal" to me.
2006-12-20 21:20:48
·
answer #2
·
answered by kitkat1640 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
I think they still may be the royal family. There are still plenty of them around and they have all the glamour and intrigue they had in the 60s. If Caroline shows up to an event, you'll be paying big bucks to attend and there is lots of paparazzi around.
Some of the other ex-presidents families are pretty glamorous too including Chelsea Clinton, the Gore children. . .
Maybe the key is that they are not related but ex-politicos?
The Bushes are not that interesting except possibly Lauren, the model daughter of Neal Bush.
My 2 cents. . .worth even less to be sure.
2006-12-19 10:52:34
·
answer #3
·
answered by Holly O 4
·
1⤊
1⤋
The Kennedy's. They are very active in politics and charity work and have more money than they could possibly count. Caroline is still around (President & Mrs. Kennedy's daughter) and has atleast one child. I think she is a lawyer. I hear that she pick up alot of charities that her mother was active in. America likes stories about welathy people and the Kennedys are among the wealthiest in th US.
2006-12-19 22:33:16
·
answer #4
·
answered by Julia B 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
The Bushes I guess. Not a GOOD royal family necessarily, but as father and son were both president, and another son keeps getting thrown into the mix, they're the closest we have.
2006-12-19 09:24:52
·
answer #5
·
answered by Jim C 4
·
1⤊
2⤋
I would definitely pick the Bushes considering our socio-political setting today. Consider this; the President's grand father was a Senator, his father was President and his brother is the Governor of Florida. Now can you beat that!
2006-12-19 20:47:28
·
answer #6
·
answered by XINGI 1
·
0⤊
1⤋
LOL ! The Hilton's .. no the Jackson's ! No just kidding I would have to say Angelina, Brad, and the kids , otherwise known as the Multicultural bunch!
2006-12-19 17:33:05
·
answer #7
·
answered by sexxisha 3
·
1⤊
1⤋
The Kennedy's are a bunch of dopes.
2006-12-19 12:35:54
·
answer #8
·
answered by obanlassie 3
·
0⤊
2⤋
the bushes 2 pres and two gov
2006-12-19 10:36:04
·
answer #9
·
answered by Nora 7
·
0⤊
2⤋