Blog @ MoreWhat.com

Imagine that. While there have been humorous references to the possibility of First Lady Bill Clinton on this blog and elsewhere, serious consideration of the matter of a former President sharing the White House with a current President has no precedent or history to guide such a situation. So how do you feel about Bill being able to circumvent Presidential term limits being married to a Presidential candidate? Regardless of whether you support or reject Clinton politics, this topic should be of concern to you. Even if the Clintons disappear, the fact remains the idea has surfaced and no matter who the couple would be, a former President and current President occupying the White House simultaneously presents some difficulty.

from David Broder….
No precedent exists for such an arrangement and no ground rules have been — or likely can be — written. When Bill Clinton was president, the enterprise that was entrusted to the first lady, health-care reform, crashed in ruins.

The causes were complex, but she was never again asked to take on such a project.

And this was simply the confusion sown by having the first lady in charge. Put the former president into the picture — however “sanitized” or insulated his role is supposed to be — and the dimensions of the problem loom even larger.

Whether there is precedent or not, at least in the case of the Clintons’, a return trip to the White House is not in the best interests of this country. No matter who you are, a couple of four year terms is more than enough time to accomplish whatever it is you came here to do. If you can’t get it done in eight years it is time for new blood.

And that thought could bring us full circle to what should be a required attribute of a candidate. Honesty is in short supply these days or so it seems at least in politics. Regardless of the President under scrutiny is the current President George Bush, the former President William Jefferson Clinton or any other, your track record for honesty and integrity even if based on nothing more than actions running contrary to basic values, perceived or as a matter of fact, should dictate your political life span. It is with that in mind that the following reference is offered.

More On Why Hillary Shouldn’t Be President
By: Herb Denenberg, The Bulletin
11/16/2007

After reading Bay Buchanan’s book The Extreme Makeover of Hillary (Rodham) Clinton, I perhaps mistakenly concluded that a phony, a fraud, and a congenital liar like Hillary Clinton could never be elected president. On Thursday, I gave my readers a small sample of Hillary’s history as a liar and a phony, which in my view are convincing beyond doubt. I urge you to read the book for yourself to be totally convinced.

My view is that if you fail the character test, you fail the political test - regardless of your political positions, your charisma, your husband or anything else. But unfortunately, that may be an erroneous conclusion. In fact, Ms. Buchanan, in her book, which makes such a compelling and powerful case on Hillary’s character flaws, doesn’t think that character will be decisive. She writes, “Not long ago, character was central to a candidate’s appeal. The logic was simple: If a person couldn’t be trusted, what did his experience, skills, or vision matter? Put another way - if the scoundrel lies to his family and friends, he’ll not hesitate to lie to the rest of us. So you couldn’t believe a word he said. That mattered to the voter (unless, of course, you were from Louisiana).”

One more recent reference on what is discussed here regularly. The scandal ridden Clinton history is not being subjected to the scrutiny it should. Hillary Rodham Clinton, and for all practical purposes, her husband, are running for President. Is it the intent of the voting public to ignore previous misdeeds?

CBS’s Greenfield Recalls Clinton Scandals Long-forgotten by Media
By Brent Baker | November 1, 2007

Prompted by Hillary Clinton’s dissembling answer during Tuesday’s Democratic presidential debate about why her White House records have not been released, CBS political correspondent Jeff Greenfield uniquely reminded “CBS Evening News” viewers on Wednesday night of her scandals not mentioned by the media in years. Greenfield outlined why Hillary Clinton, contrary to her claim the National Archives is delaying the release when, in fact, President Clinton asked communication between him and the First Lady be withheld until 2012, wants to keep secret her papers from the White House years:

This entry was posted on Tuesday, November 20th, 2007 at 1:14 pm and is filed under Public Affairs, wordpress, Politics, campaign, election, Democrats, conspiracy, Clinton, disclosure, ethics, Law, Justice. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.