Sen. Bill Clinton (D-N.Y.)?

Ronald Bailey | November 26, 2008

The Washington Post is running an op/ed today by Karl E. Meyer and Shareen Blair Brysac urging that New York's Gov. David Paterson appoint former president Bill Clinton to replace his wife should she be apponted Secretary of State. The op/ed offers the following reasons for this stunning proposal:

Amid the blizzard of résumés blanketing Washington as the Obama era dawns, there is a superbly qualified candidate for full employment whose name has been overlooked. We refer, of course, to William Jefferson Clinton, America's 42nd chief executive and commander in chief. Yet now, by a wonderful combination of circumstances, comes an opportunity to harness his unquestioned political talents to benefit his country, the Democratic Party, New York state and his spouse...

Who in his party could question so historic and dazzling a choice? In a stroke, the appointment would provide Sen. Clinton's indefatigable husband with a fitting day job, serve the interests of a state beset by a meltdown in its most vital economic sector and offer a refreshing reverse twist on a tradition whereby deceased male senators, representatives or governors are succeeded by their widows...

In today's unusual circumstances, surely beyond the imagination of any novelist, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton would not have to fret about suitable protocol for dealing with her spouse on foreign trips were he occupied, full time, with senatorial duties. 

I, for one, am just worried sick about the "suitable protocol" issue. Am I the only one who thinks that this is a really bad idea?

Comments

hotsauce|11.26.08 @ 1:13PM|#

I don't see the upside for Bill. He's worth much less as a sitting senator than an "unemployed" former president.

Bingo|11.26.08 @ 1:13PM|#

I'm more worried about the fact that our nation seems to be run by an increasingly small set of society.

|11.26.08 @ 1:15PM|#

Meh. We could do a lot worse than slick Willie. And I bet there's thousands of young full figured girls that would line up to work under him. Everybody wins.

economist|11.26.08 @ 1:15PM|#

I don't object too highly. If a Senator from NY keels over from a heart attack one day, the world will be a better place.

SIV|11.26.08 @ 1:15PM|#

Look at the bright side Bingo
Less people to hang.

BDB|11.26.08 @ 1:16PM|#

He'd agree to it in a heartbeat because he'd get interns and staffers to screw.

economist|11.26.08 @ 1:16PM|#

And Warren's right. On the grand scale of bad things to come from New York, a Senator Bill Clinton isn't too bad.

economist|11.26.08 @ 1:17PM|#

BDB,
Some say that his health troubles have made him slightly less...active, than before.

BDB|11.26.08 @ 1:17PM|#

Yeah, would he really be any worse than say, Senator Bloomberg? Or hell, Senator Schumer?

BDB|11.26.08 @ 1:18PM|#

"economist | November 26, 2008, 1:17pm | #
BDB,
Some say that his health troubles have made him slightly less...active, than before."

Theres viagra, levitra, etc. I haven't heard he has been less active--I read in Vanity Fair that he nick names the private jet he travels in "Air Fuck One".

hotsauce|11.26.08 @ 1:18PM|#

Realistically, the only government post I see him accepting is a SCOTUS nod. They get clerks, though I doubt they're as cute as undergrad interns.

BDB|11.26.08 @ 1:19PM|#

"hotsauce | November 26, 2008, 1:18pm | #
Realistically, the only government post I see him accepting is a SCOTUS nod. They get clerks, though I doubt they're as cute as undergrad interns."

Dude, it's Clinton. He's the kind of guy who says "It's all the same with the lights off!". Look at his previous mistresses.

economist|11.26.08 @ 1:22PM|#

"Yeah, would he really be any worse than say, Senator Bloomberg?"
Well, if we're going that low, since Cthulhu lost his presidential bid...

economist|11.26.08 @ 1:22PM|#

"It's all the same with the lights off"="Poontang is poontang"

|11.26.08 @ 1:29PM|#

Am I the only one who thinks that this is a really bad idea?

Of course it's an imbecilic idea, but is it a "really bad" idea? Politics as a source of humor is widely acknowledged. Having Bill Clinton return to DC as a Senator would be all sorts of yuks.

|11.26.08 @ 1:37PM|#

Appointing spouses to fill out the terms of elected officials is an old tradition in American history. In the past, this usually meant a wife filling out the term of a deceased husband. They did so on the theory that spouses shared political philosophies so a spouses made the best replacement.

In the case of Clinton, I am afraid that given the political culture of New York, whomever they pick won't be good from a libertarian perspective.

|11.26.08 @ 1:38PM|#

I think this is a great idea to solve the dwindling parody deficit. I had thought that Bush represented "peak" humor, but am glad to see that we are willing to exploit new humor resources.

|11.26.08 @ 1:38PM|#

I'm worried about the precedent it may set.

From now on, will the junior senator from NY be expected to sleep with the SoS? That's assuming that they still sleep together, which is probably a bad assumption.

I'm sure there are plenty of comfortable couches in the Whitehouse.

|11.26.08 @ 1:38PM|#

Dude, it's Clinton. He's the kind of guy who says "It's all the same with the lights off!". Look at his previous mistresses.

I figure there are three explanations:

1. He has no taste/discrimination, and will bang anything that moves.

2. He purposefully targets mediocre women in order to throw people off the scent. The press is looking for girls that are mistress material, not Monica.

3. He's more repugnant than he seems and targets women he has influence and power over, specifically to revel in that power.

Thoughts?

Guy Montag|11.26.08 @ 1:39PM|#

Betcha the Governor never saw this coming.

t3knomanser|11.26.08 @ 1:45PM|#

My father, chairman of the Democratic party in a town in NYS is sending a letter to the governor nominating himself for Clinton's seat.

It's a small town, but I'd rather see him in that seat than an entrenched politician that isn't from the state.

sfb|11.26.08 @ 1:47PM|#

I was hoping that the new administration would take a liking to "extrordinary rendition" and relocate the 42nd president to whatever location will serve as the next Gitmo.

Offering SoS to Hillary seemed to indicate that Bill's time was up.

thoreau|11.26.08 @ 1:57PM|#

I'm with Bingo. The club at the top is way too tiny. OK, it's probably always been that way to an extent, but the magnitude of the problem can wax and wane over time. Why push it?

Still, Sen. Bill Clinton could be entertaining.

Re: Supreme Court Justice Bill Clinton, I can't imagine a guy with his personality consenting to be part of a group that maintains a fairly low profile (unless maybe he was Chief Justice, but that won't happen given the age and health of John Roberts). In the Senate, his style would be more appropriate.

|11.26.08 @ 2:07PM|#

I kinda like the idea. Maybe all former presidents should retire to the Senate. It would probably make elections a tad less contentious - they all know they have a senate seat waiting for them if they lose.

sfb|11.26.08 @ 2:13PM|#

Senator-for-life Bill Clinton with immunity from past indescretions -- We're still in South Americal right?

bubba|11.26.08 @ 2:23PM|#

[Clinton is] more repugnant than he seems and targets women he has influence and power over, specifically to revel in that power.

How is that not obvious?

Back to the topic: We're supposed to give Clinton a Senate seat so that he doesn't have to travel with Hillary?

Is it normal for the SOS to take his/her spouse along on business?

And obviously, the salary of a Senator isn't going to make a dent in all that campaign debt.

|11.26.08 @ 2:32PM|#

I don't think he'd be interested. BDB, what makes you think that "globetrotting millionaire former president" gets you less action than "Senator?"

SJE | November 26, 2008, 1:38pm | #

I think this is a great idea to solve the dwindling parody deficit.

Agreed. Ever since Barack Obama stopped talking like "the Rock" during his speeches, he's been impossible to parody, and we can't count on residual Palin humor to keep SNL going forever.

alan|11.26.08 @ 2:32PM|#

Not a bad choice when you consider the alternative: some one from the NY political machine that would would make Schumer, Paterson and the other slime balls that run the state very happy.

Xeones|11.26.08 @ 2:33PM|#

"It's all the same with the lights off"="Poontang is poontang"

Anything warm and concave, right?

Ska|11.26.08 @ 2:36PM|#

1. He has no taste/discrimination, and will bang anything that moves.


Isn't that Andy Dick's claim to fame?

Ska|11.26.08 @ 2:37PM|#

Oh, Andy really does mean anything, where Clinton likely means a 6 or better.

Ska|11.26.08 @ 2:38PM|#

And female.






3ple post fail.

|11.26.08 @ 2:43PM|#

Isn't that Andy Dick's claim to fame?

"I wouldn't fuck Andy Dick with Bea Arthur's penis."

Jim Lesczynski|11.26.08 @ 2:45PM|#

Not that it will matter to anyone, but Hillary is constitutionally prohibited from serving as Secretary of State:

http://serfcity.wordpress.com/2008/11/26/constitution-bars-hillary-from-secretary-of-state/

|11.26.08 @ 2:47PM|#

I've been expecting this since the first time I heard Hillary was headed for Foggy Bottom. I'm merely surprised ot took this long to get play.

As for SCOTUS, isn't disbarment an impediment?

|11.26.08 @ 2:57PM|#

Interesting find, Jim L.

The Google says this situation has come up several times before, and has been addressed by lowering the salary.

|11.26.08 @ 3:01PM|#

I think Patterson should name himself. He's the best thing to come to Albany in 50 years. He is standing up to the tax ad spend retards by demanding either services get cut or more income come in, and he refuses to raise taxes for fear of driving away the more productive members of New York.

He'll never be reelected, so he should move over to where he might be able to set an example of progressive fiscal conservatism.

dfd|11.26.08 @ 3:09PM|#

No Senator or Representative shall, during the Time for which he was elected, be appointed to any civil Office under the Authority of the United States which shall have been created, or the Emoluments whereof shall have been increased during such time;

Ah, but notice it says "during the Time for which he was elected" but is entirely silent about the time for which she is elected. :)

Jacob|11.26.08 @ 3:09PM|#

I wouldn't mind another anti-regulation, free-trade, pro-business Democrat in the Congress.

Alonzo P. Scraggs|11.26.08 @ 3:13PM|#

Bill will start to get hot and chase those Senate interns around the whole world. This will make him a global, warming, D-NY'er.

|11.26.08 @ 3:17PM|#

He'll never be reelected

What makes you say that?

Favorable Unfavorable Don't Know/No Opinion
David Paterson 64% 19% 17%
Andrew Cuomo 61% 19% 20%
Thomas DiNapoli 18% 10% 72%
Sheldon Silver 24% 36% 40%
James Tedisco 12% 10% 78%
Dean Skelos 10% 11% 79%
Malcolm Smith 10% 11% 79%
Hillary Clinton 61% 35% 4%
Charles Schumer 60% 27% 13%
Mike Bloomberg 60% 26% 14%
Rudy Giuliani 57% 39% 4%
Barack Obama 70% 23% 8%
George Bush 22% 75% 3%

He's the most popular political figure in New York, with a net +45%, close to Barack Obama's +47%.

|11.26.08 @ 3:26PM|#

Jim L, are you sure a resignation from the Senate wouldn't clear that up? It sounds like the goal was to keep people from collecting multiple offices. The Hildabeast can't be the first sitting Senator appointed to something.

|11.26.08 @ 3:28PM|#

jsh,

The purpose was to keep Congresspeople from creating featherbeds then jumping into them.

|11.26.08 @ 5:28PM|#

I think it's a bad idea.

|11.26.08 @ 5:40PM|#

I think Bill's going to need to be closer than Capitol Hill to keep his organization running smoothly.

|11.26.08 @ 6:48PM|#

P Brooks, nothing (other than tradition) requires that a member of SCOTUS be a lawyer.

rhywun|11.26.08 @ 6:49PM|#

I'd vote for Paterson. He's been infinitely better than that jerk before him.

|11.26.08 @ 7:54PM|#

"P Brooks, nothing (other than tradition) requires that a member of SCOTUS be a lawyer."

I don't think there are any requirements whatsoever. You could theoretically nominate an 8-year-old boy from Guatemala. But correct me if I'm wrong, since I did read this controversy related to his disbarment elsewhere.

J|11.26.08 @ 8:23PM|#

Try Bill Clinton for MAYOR. As a New Yorker, I'm waiting for the Dem who can beat Bloomberg. Bill could be one of our greatest mayors - NYers love him, he has the balls and he knows how to schmooze. He could be a better Koch (and I grew up with Koch - a guy who really loved our city, and of course drove it to near bankruptcy.) God, I loved Koch! billclintonformayor.com

ed|11.27.08 @ 11:13AM|#

Why not? He could join, if I am not mistaken, John Quincy Adams as one of only two ex-presidents to serve in congress, and the only one to be appointed to the office.

Peggy McGilligan|11.27.08 @ 4:54PM|#

Suitable protocol? You decide: http://theseedsof9-11.com

|11.28.08 @ 4:51PM|#

obama is a figure head, look at his cabinet selection, The clinton crew is still in command, clinton does not have to run for reelection!!!!!!!!!

|11.28.08 @ 9:20PM|#

blah blah blah [insert clinton-lewinsky reference/joke here]
blah blah blah

jerry w|11.29.08 @ 9:11PM|#

So what if Bill Clinton has access to "thousands" of interns, his track record is, as far as we know, one at a time. Compare that to "W" and Darth Cheney who have made screwing millions of Americans at a time into a fine art.
Jerry w
www.boskolives.wordpress.com

|11.29.08 @ 10:44PM|#

My sense is Bill would see a senate seat as a step down, on some level, from his current position as, well, husband to the SOS. He'll get to participate 'behind the scenes' to the degree Hillary lets him. As a senator he's one of many. That's not his way.