Skip to comments.Ex-prez won't leave the stage
Posted on 05/30/2003 7:47:21 AM PDT by presidio9
Half the people came to worship Bill Clinton. The other half came to see if the old guy really still ``had the juice'' and the former president, who always seems to crave adulation, needed to win them all over.
And he's good, dammit, really good. Who else could make eye contact with several hundred people for a couple of hours during a speech and ``conversation'' at the John F. Kennedy Library Wednesday.
``It's amazing how he does that,'' said one young woman. ``I would swear he was looking right at me.''
He was lean (what, are there no McDonald's in Chappaqua?) and he was loose (``I don't care, I'm not runnin' for anything,'' he said and then proceeded to crack wise and say of the 2000 election results, ``At least it gave our Supreme Court a rare opportunity to stand up for minority rights.'')
But the man who once convinced the better part of this nation that he felt their pain wanted his audience to feel just a little of his own in his post-presidential phase.
In answer to a question from historian Michael Beschloss, Clinton said, ``I think I was well suited to the times in which I served because I have a high pain threshold. . . Because of my upbringing I had a particular tolerance for it.''
And while he conceded it was probably OK for historians and biographers to poke around in the private lives of presidents, especially long after they're gone, he added, there's a ``big difference if you have to deal every day with those trying to turn a public person into a private pinata.''
Well, pinata-boy is doin' OK these days. Sure, he misses the perks and he misses the work (``I loved being president,'' he said.), but he added, ``I think I was surprised at how happy I was to have my life back.''
Yeah, we know where we could go with a statement like that, but Clinton clarified that it meant hanging out in the local coffee shop in Chappaqua with the regulars. Whatever. . .
And even Clinton noted that financially he was doin' just fine, thank you very much. Of course, he did so in the context of arguing against the tax cut that President Bush was signing into law that day.
You just can't keep an old triangulator from triangulating, so Clinton beat up on the Republicans ``for whom tax cuts are ideological, almost theological.'' He called this particular one ``grossly unfair'' because it gave some money back to ``rich people'' like him and because ``these tax cuts are too small in the short run to do any good and too big in the long run.''
And then as if Dick Morris were still whispering sweet political nothings in his ear, Clinton added that he, of course, liked the child tax credit and ending the marriage penalty.
Would anyone be surprised that in a column in Thursday's New York Post, commenting on the skill with which Bush will have it both ways on the tax cut, Morris wrote, ``How can a Democrat oppose expanding the child-tax credit, lowering the tax rates on the two lowest brackets and repealing of the marriage penalty?''
Yep, even when it comes to parsing a complex issue like the tax cut, the guy's still a master - just as he is at playing elder statesman while skillfully turning the knife on the Bush administration.
``It never occurred to me that I was in sole possession of the truth,'' he professed about his White House years, then added, ``But we now face those who have exclusive claim to the truth.''
Charming and ruthless, flawed and beguiling, Clinton continues to fascinate because he remains that bundle of contradictions. That and because he remains on the stage. The coffee shop in Chappaqua aside, it's where he really lives.
He wasn't looking, he was leering.
You're too kind.
Ruthless, yes....flawed, definitely yes...beguiling, cobras are beguiling....fascinating, revolting is more accurate.
"We acted like spoiled, petulant children and turned our backs on an upstanding, high-caliber, former war hero because he capitulated to a venal George Mitchell plot to break the "read my lips" pledge, and because he wasn't Ronaldus Magnus. Things were so good back then we thought we'd indulge ourselves by electing a man-child charlatan "for kicks". We got what we deserved!!! "
It wasn't as simple as you say...For one thing this man's name comes to my mind here.."Ross Perot".
I agree with your mention of the "read my lips" phrase...although that would have never got traction...if it wouldn't have been a DNC ''talking point'' that was faxed to every lame-stream mouth piece Clymer in the nation..!! And if the moronic walking dead Elephants in both house's..had a clue.
"WE"...didn't get what "WE" deserved....."WE" got what the brain-washed unthinking Sheeple in this country apparently wanted..!!
I frankly think..."WE" can lay the blame squarely on the MEDIOT's in this country...for NOT...doing their JOBS!! They are supposed to be watch-dogs...not SocialistMarxistDemoLiberal lap dogs..!!
RANT OFF...nothing personal. hehehe......
"I did not have sex with that woman."
It's traditional to insert more padding than this between mutually exclusive statements.
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.