Posted on 01/25/2003 11:18:00 AM PST by cody32127
It appears that former U.S. presidents don't just leave office and fade away. Rather, they brood over their dwindling influence and compulsively seek public attention with ever more ridiculous public pronouncement and publicity stunts.
Enter America's biggest walking, talking political joke, William Jefferson Clinton. As popular Big Apple columnist Mugger recently opined:
Clinton is a national embarrassment, a bored and bitter politician whose weekly routine is a mixture of lucrative (and usually incoherent) speeches around the world, socializing with celebrities and criticizing Bush with an unprecedented zeal, demolishing the tradition of an ex-president keeping mum, at least for several years, about his successor. Even Jimmy Carter, who disgracefully accepted a Nobel Peace Prize that was awarded to him only as a rebuke to Bush, looks graceful in comparison. Witness Bill Clinton's recent ill-chosen remarks accusing the Republican Party of playing the "race card" in recent elections by pursuing a cynical Southern strategy of exploiting antipathy against minority members among white voters. Notwithstanding the sheer untruthfulness of Clinton's remarks, it's not as if Bill Clinton never played the race card himself in past elections, playing on the irrational fears of poor blacks by demonizing evil KKK stalwart Newt Gingrich as the Grinch who was going to eliminate Social Security and take away minority members' welfare checks.
In his recent column, Mugger predicted that Bill Clinton will disappear from the American political scene in 2003. Of course, this whimsical New Year's prediction is simply wishful thinking. The empty shell that is the real Bill Clinton would simply implode if he couldn't schmooze worshipful gatherings of gullible rich admirers around the world, or preen before the TV news cameras. The only way he's going to disappear from public life in 2003 is if he's thrown in the slammer for his many past crimes, as he well should be.
Since the 12th Amendment changed the way the Vice President is selected, there have been only two Vice Presidents who successfully won the Presidency immediately after the President they served: Martin van Buren and George H. W. Bush. Against that set John C. Breckinridge in 1860, Richard Nixon in 1960, Hubert Humphrey in 1968, and Al Gore in 2000, who tried and failed.
For prime candidates in 2008, assuming Bush is re-elected, we should think in terms of Cabinet officers, Republican governors, and leaders in Congress such as Senator Frist. If Cheney doesn't want a second term as VP, Bush should pick the person who can best help him in that role, not necessarily the person he thinks could most easily win the Presidency in 2008. Remember that in 1988, Ronald Reagan did not take sides in the Republican primary contest.
Because they cheat. You know it, I know it, they know it and everyone with a trace of intellectual honesty knows it. It's so blatant and rampant that I don't even think a 90% turnout in an overwhelmingly Dem district can be considered a particularly successful effort for them. Several districts in Philadelphia had in excess of 100% turnout in the 2000 election. When they start smashing the boundaries of what's mathematically possible, that's when you know the Rats have got their fraud on (as the kids say).
Register DEM and vote for Sharpton in the DEM primaries. That should shove a finger into a very uncomfortable place in the DEM party. Let's see how they handle a good show for Al in the primaries.
The Rats are about to get a lesson in "what comes around goes around". Remember how they went to polls in droves for McCain? It's time to return the favor.
I have nothing but comtempt for him,but he is the reincarnation of Barry Goldwater compared to Rudy.
He has his warts but will be the candidate for the Repubs in '04.
Sad to say,but I agree.
I don't think you understand Rudy.
I understand him perfectly,he is a "law and order" leftist.
Also, Condi is not just about race and gender. She's a very bright and knowledgable lady, particularly in foreign policy.
No doubt,but if she were a white male,nobody would be mentioning her name,and when they did,people would say "Who?". Republicans are desperate to "prove" that they aren't racists,so many seem to have a tendency to want to crown any black who speakes regular English and is to the right of Jesse Jackson. Grading Condi on her credentials and bio alone,she is not qualified to even be considered as a VP candidate. She has never been elected to anything. Let her go home to Ca and run for Boxer or Fineswine's Senate seat,and get some "seasoning",and then we will see. To be honest with you, I like Harry Browne but he's not electable.
You're right.
I think we all tend to vote for the lesser of many evils. I've voted against Gore, Clinton, et. al.
I've done that the last few election cycles,but will never do it again. When you continue to vote for the lesser of two evils,not only are you STILL voting for evil,but you are not giving either main political party any reason to run anything but their standard evil candidates. As long as we keep voting for these criminals,the parties will keep running them. Unless we get lucky and somebody beats Bubba-2 in the primary,I will not be voting for a presidential candidate in 2004.
And it really galls you,doesn't it? Don't worry,your hero Ali Bubba-2 will no doubt soon have his "Office of Reich Security" stormtroopers running around arresting people without warrants and holding them without bail or legal representation for such major crimes as being critical of royalty.
A cause as worthy as fighting Islamofacism, as far as I'm concerned.
Should it come to that, you won't be alone. Not by a long shot.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.