November 4, 2009

"Clinton wishes he had left White House 'in a coffin.'"

Ridiculous headline. Here's what Bill Clinton said:
"It's good that we have a (term) limit. Otherwise I would have stayed until I was carried away in a coffin. Or defeated in an election... I loved doing the job."

38 comments:

traditionalguy said...

That is a scary thought. Poor Hillary would never have had a life of her own. And the teenage interns at the White House would have never been able to get a decent nights rest.

Bissage said...

Many of Bill Clinton’s little deaths left the White House in a young woman’s stomach.

Scott M said...

I know he's just going off the cuff, but he is, whether knowingly or not, providing fodder.

I believe we're at a point in American history where we need to do away with presidential re-elections and just go to one six-year term. I also believe we'll see that happen at some point.

Term limits now. Rotation of service is the only way a democracy (or republic) can remain relatively free from creeping corruption over time.

Florida said...

Getting head from young interns while your wife gets the blame for screwing up health care reform?

Who wouldn't want that job for life!

Fred4Pres said...

I appreciate Bill Clinton's honesty on this point, but beware of people who love that job too much. Personally I want to see President's leaving in a somber sober mood. Of having treated the job as a responsibility and point of service, that should be turned over after two terms. That was the example of George Washington.

Beware of tyrants who want to do what they think is best for you. They are often the worse sort of tyrants.

former law student said...

the "they'll have to carry me out feet first" phrasing is more standard. Or, as a Maugham character said:

"I shan't stir again till they carry me out feet first in my coffin."

edutcher said...

My God, what a slug! What he loved was doing any woman who wasn't Hillary, whether said woman wanted anything to do with him or not.

He gave us subprime mortgages, cut the military by 40%, and left a mess which Dubya handled a lot better than The Won is handling the problems left him

Sloanasaurus said...

The Romans, although sad about the oss of their republic thought assigning absolute power to one man would work also... that is until Tiberius, and Caligula, and Nero... etc...

kentuckyliz said...

It's a good thing he didn't say that while in office.

Some wacko would have been happy to oblige.

WV coldins
More like, warmins, coldouts

The Crack Emcee said...

He also helped Tom Harkin start the billion dollar NewAge boondoggle of NCCAM.

Can't stand the man.

ricpic said...

As president Clinton worked harder than he had ever worked in his life. He told us so. He also told us he never had sex with that woman. I wish I could think of something clever at this point. But all I can think of is what human vomit he was and is.

David said...

In a coffin? How would they close it if he was lying on his back (the usual position)?

former law student said...

He also told us he never had sex with that woman

You don't remember the 50s and the 60s. Only P-i-V sex is sex, silly. What Bill was doing was "heavy petting."

garage mahal said...

The 15 yr old Clinton sex jokes just never get old.

Hoosier Daddy said...

I'll take a Clinton presidency with the Gingrich Congress any day.

Hell, I'll even donate to the cigar and fat chick fund too!

Comrade X said...

As president Clinton worked harder than he had ever worked in his life. He told us so.

I remember those 2 weeks. No middle class tax cut for you!

Scott M said...

@FLS

Ah...so P-i-A isn't sex? Or P-i-M? It also strikes me a funny that a liberal would ask that we recall how things were in the 50's and 60's and apply it to contemporary issues.

LOL indeed.

former law student said...

a liberal would ask that we recall how things were in the 50's and 60's

Some black letter law:

Perjury requires proof that a defendant, while under oath, knowingly made a false statement as to material facts.United States v. Dunnigan, 507 U.S. 87, 94 (1993). The "knowingly " requirement is a high burden: the government must prove the defendant had a subjective awareness of the falsity of his statement at the time he provided it. United States v. Dowdy, 479 F.2d 213, 230 (4th Cir. 1973); United States v. Markiewicz, 978 F.2d 786, 811 (2d Cir. 1992).

If Bill honestly believed that only P-i-V was sex, then he did not lie about what he and Monica were doing.

Penny said...

"...the "they'll have to carry me out feet first" phrasing is more standard."

For all but Bill Clinton, who always lead with his head, using both with equal enthusiasm.

Scott M said...

if Bill honestly believed that only P-i-V was sex, then he did not lie about what he and Monica were doing.

I wasn't asking Bill. I was asking you and you ducked the question at hand...yet again.

Since you brought it up, though, it strikes me as laughable that a man with his renowned libido would even harbor the definition you suggest in any context other than a court of law.

At least President Obama had the balls (somewhat) to admit drug use. Bill didn't inhale, remember?

former law student said...

Ah, Scott M was asking me a personal question, unrelated to Bill Clinton's definition of sex.

Would you be so kind as to remind me why I owe the world answers to personal questions?

Scott M said...

Would you be so kind as to remind me why I owe the world answers to personal questions?

Certainly.

Because upthread you (not Bill) made this statement:

You don't remember the 50s and the 60s. Only P-i-V sex is sex, silly. What Bill was doing was "heavy petting."

If you're going to backtrack from a conclusion you came to, and accused me of being silly for not remembering as well as you can, then I expect you to back that up.

WV-owerball "one P short of being a millionaire"

Maguro said...

"Heavy petting"? What is this, a Judy Blume novel?

scinfinity said...

So, the guy who could never pull down a majority of the vote is convinced he'd never be able to be defeated?

former law student said...

If you're going to backtrack from a conclusion you came to

ah. You have mistaken me for a Zeitgeist. I am not a Zeitgeist. Nor am I the sexual mores of the 50s and the 60s.

Scott M said...

Good. So we've established that you think that point of view you (jokingly I assume) put forward is bullshit by even late 90's standards. I'm with you there.

Is it such a leap to assume that a lecherous "God's gift to women" type of man thinks it's bullshit too and was only arguing your original point to avoid getting in further trouble than he already was?

former law student said...

yeah, I figured "heavy petting" would have been the tipoff. But Clinton's upbringing did support his interpretation of "sex."

On the other hand, I cannot see a basis for "that depends on what the definition of 'is' is."

Kirk Parker said...

I'll settle for wishing he left it the way he found it.

Ralph L said...

I thought there's no use getting
Into heavy petting
It only leads to trouble
And seat-wetting.

If you recall, the lawyers and judge agreed to an explicit (and broad) definition of sex. Clinton then lied.

WV menestse - dangerous African flies that only bite once a month.

Synova said...

I can't see any reason to criticize Clinton for this. The incredibly stupid headline isn't his fault, and he's right about the substance of it.

Term limits are *important* because even a good person would be tempted to stay forever.

We're seeing term limits abandoned in Central America and our present President hasn't said a single thing, not one thing, about why they are important. They are VITAL and at least Clinton understands.

I don't mind that someone likes being President. Bush also said that he loved the job.

"Term limits now. Rotation of service is the only way a democracy (or republic) can remain relatively free from creeping corruption over time."

This is utterly true.

Eight years total is one of the shortest term limits in the world, or so I've heard. I think that two four year terms is acceptable. People argue that longer ones would allow a President to get more done. The world moves faster now, not slower, so I'm unconvinced by that argument.

Term limits for the Senate and House would be a very good thing. Something set in total years and long enough to allow a measure of experience and senior status but... not a lifetime! I'd be willing to go as high as 20 years. That's really long and definitely long enough but would still force turn-over.

The thing is that *people* do not want to give up the seniority that their Senator or Congressperson has earned. No matter how much they can't stand Kennedy or Tip O'Neil or Murtha. They're going to be highly motivated to vote for that old fossil in preference to a brand new person who is going to start out with NO influence for their district. Influence for their district, those "local" politics, is going to trump ideology every time.

So 20 years. Lots of time to gain influence and seniority, but with a set sell-by date.

It might seem like so long that I'm not serious about limitations at all, but there are people who are/were in the Senate or House for their entire lives.

Synova said...

"So, the guy who could never pull down a majority of the vote is convinced he'd never be able to be defeated?"

The incumbent always has an advantage.

The possibility of being able to stay in office forever always leads to doing whatever is possible, legal or not, to make that happen.

What are the chances of Chavez being "voted" out of office? Or now, Ortega? Did it ever get *bad* enough in Zimbabwe for anyone to vote Mugabe out of office?

Cedarford said...

edutcher - He gave us subprime mortgages, cut the military by 40%, and left a mess which Dubya handled a lot better than The Won is handling the problems left him..

I disagree. Clinton left with the country in pretty good shape, save the collapse of the tech bubble happening as he split.
Bush then bungled it all up, leaving a beyond Carteresque mess. And alas, The One is no Reagan. He's looking like another Carter or Dubya.

As for military cuts, they were agreed to in bipartisan fashion at the end of the Cold War, and Clinton basically followed the framework that Bush I set in place for military downsizing and reduction of excess capacity. I got out after the Gulf War, then watched as guys I knew who stayed in and had top ratings were caught up in RIF. (reduction in force).

blake said...

I kept wondering where he'd get a coffin big enough to put the White House in.

Ern said...

I loved doing the job.

It would have been nice if he had actually done the job, instead of spouting brave words and doing nothing after the World Trade Center bombing, the USS Cole bombing, etc. The World Trade Center might actually be standing to do if he had the job.

AllenS said...

Since Mr. Clinton confided that he had lined his truck bed with Astroturf, adding with a sly grin, "You don't want to know why, but I did." I'll have to assume that his coffin would also be lined with Astroturf.

former law student said...

doing nothing after the World Trade Center bombing

What should Clinton have done that he didn't do? Most of the conspirators were caught and convicted. The FBI let one go.

Tammy Hicks said...

I believe we as a country need someone in office who we have not yet had in office. Our country is in a state right now that no one knows how we got to this point. Was it Bush Sr.’s goals and actions that got us to this point, or was it Clinton’s, or Bush Jr’s? No will know exactly what got our housing market and economy to where it is at right now until the repercussions of such acts from our previous presidents. We all have our beliefs of what we think happen and what was done wrong in our eyes. I believe Clinton was a good president, I am not a democratic but I think he did a good job during his eight years of office. With that being said, I still don’t think, even if he could serve more years, he should serve more years as the United States President. My opinion about Clinton and how did a president of the United States might change one day but I will stand by my opinion as of right now until we as a country learn what exactly it was that got our economy where it is today.

Synova said...

Clinton knew about, but didn't take out, Bin Laden as well.

But I believe that he was right in his decisions not to order the assassination of the guy, given that no one can see the future. And we really ought not go around killing all the various bad guys just in case they figure out how to cause a whole lot of damage at some time in the future.

That said (and Bin Laden is certainly long dead and rotted) at some point events do push past some sort of threshold where more aggressive and pre-emptive actions are called for in order to push back again, even against those who've done less, if nothing else in order to send a clear message that the earlier patience and inaction ought not be interpreted as a lack of will or ability to, as they say, reach out.