On Sunday, Hillary Clinton made the announcement that she is running, once again, for president of the United States. In what was, of course, a tremendously anti-climactic announcement, the former first lady told the world that ... oh, I don't know what she said. I didn't watch, since I can't really imagine that she said anything we haven't already heard the last eight years, and because she has no real credibility.
Besides, I was more interested in the Masters.
All that said, I did do some contemplating between shots. Not, of course, of the "What would Hillary do as president" kind of thing, because we already know that. Think the abuses of the Obama administration's IRS and Justice Department, and then triple it to reflect oversight by a much more vengeful White House.
No; I was contemplating the role of the former president to whom she is still, remarkably, married. That would be William Jefferson Clinton, once sax-player-in-chief, and now a half-million-per-speech celebrity, running around the world getting paid to pal around with friends. Let us, if we can, try to imagine Bill Clinton as first lady.
The mind boggles.
Obviously, the Clinton Foundation, which raises tons of money to spend a little on left-wing causes and presumably a lot on salaries for the Clintons -- Bill gets about $10 million a year for his speeches -- would be devastated. With one Clinton as the sitting president and another as First Whatever, the Foundation contributions would have to switch from predominantly foreign influence-buyers to predominantly something else -- domestic, maybe.
But even that is troublesome. How does one legally segregate contributions to a foundation from the perception of influencing the president whose name is on it? Well, you can't. But the next person to tell the Clintons -- particularly Hillary -- what they can and cannot do will be the first. Heck, Obama couldn't even get her to use a Department of State email address, and he was the president!
Still, that wasn't as much my wandering thinking Sunday as was trying to imagine a scenario where Bill actually wants Hillary to run. Seriously? In his mind, he has "earned" the right to live the life he has now, living where he wants, going where he wants, flush with cash and female attention (not, of course, of the domestic tranquility type), world traveler, speechifier, golfer, friend of the wealthy in countries we're not at all friendly with, friend of the wealthy in countries that don't exactly treat women really well.
Oh, yeah, Bill, that all will have to go. You will have to come up with a new role as the dutiful husband living in the White House (ostensibly), under a doubled level of Secret Service support while trying to get as far from Hillary as you can.
Bill Clinton is not a stupid man. He sees this just the same as I do. And it took a ton of inevitability for him not to tell Hillary that if she ran, he would not support her efforts. But he wasn't able to stop the inevitability of her candidacy.
And all he can now hope for is that the Republicans come up with someone who can win enough states to beat her in November 2016.
If it makes you feel better, Bill, I'm squarely with you on that one.
Copyright 2015 by Robert Sutton
Like what you read here? There's a new post at www.uberthoughtsUSA.com at 10am every weekday.
If we elect someone we know in advance is totally corrupt, exposing new corruption will have no effect whatever. So she gets another billion from corrupt Islamic misogynists? What difference, at this point, does that make?
ReplyDeleteDon't know the answer to that, Anon. Obviously the central concern is whether she would get elected at all, i.e., whether the voting public is willing to vote in someone who IS totally corrupt as we know her to be. I imagine that if they are, and she gets elected, then all that cash from corrupt Islamic misogynists (CIMs for short) will keep flowing indeed. The good news, of course, is that the voters will have declared that they don't care -- meaning, I guess, that we shouldn't, either :(
ReplyDeleteIf I remember correctly, so far the first three Republican announcements were all from first term Senators with insignificant legislative records, no executive experience, no financial experience, and no foreign policy experience. Haven't we already tried that? Not that I would want her in any office, I suspect another Clinton would have no trouble beating any of those.
ReplyDeleteInterestingly, all those years of Harry Reid freezing the Senate, kind of like Elsa in the movie, had the ancillary effect of providing no opportunity for Republican senators -- or, for that matter, Democrats -- to achieve anything in terms of building a record. Dang clever, that Dirty Harry.
ReplyDelete