Not since Buddy died under mysterious circumstances (โDid he smell too much?โ) have we had so many opportunities to make fun of the former president. Everyoneโs got an idea for what it should be called: The XXX-Files, West Schwiiiiing!, etc. Rush Limbaugh thinks the tagline should be โA No Stain Zone.โ The Washington Postโs Lloyd Grove offers โWho Wants to Be a Pardonee?โ Poke around the web like Bill Clinton at a womenโs college job fair, and you can find dozens more: Crouching Intern, Hidden Cigar, To Tell a Lie, etc., etc.
Amidst all the tittering thereโs also a lot of outrage. How dare he! The man has no shame! Will our long national nightmare ever end?!? This seems to be the sentiment of lots of the folks at Lucianne.com, for example, and in my own e-mail box.
Now, Iโm one of those guys who normally thinks there can never be enough outrage over Clinton. But I donโt get it. I think it would be a wonderful thing for Bill Clinton to get a TV show.
Okay, one caveat. I can understand if youโre simply sick of him. If youโre tired of the lip-biting and the poor-me stuff, then fine. I guess Iโm with you.
But what Iโm talking about is if youโre serious in your Clinton-hating. If itโs not just some faddish reaction that over time fades away to only mild contempt or even โ gasp โ sneaking aspiration. If you really think he was a white-trash messiah preening at his own reflection in a pool of fried-chicken grease โ then why wouldnโt you want him to be on TV all the time?
Seriously, whenever Bill Clinton was allowed to speak freely in a relaxed setting, or when he was caught off-guard, he made a fool of himself. He was so compelled to please whoever was listening to him, heโd say whatever they wanted to hear with seemingly unparalleled conviction.
Just a few quick examples off the top of my head: When asked how heโd vote on the Gulf War, he said he agreed with the minority but would have voted the majority. He said, โI have vivid and painful memories of black churches being burned in my own state when I was a childโ when, of course, no such events โ vivid or otherwise โ transpired in Arkansas when he was a kid. When he visited the Greeks he told them that he agreed with them, they should get the Elgin marbles back from Britain. When in Israel, he said he had had a โprofoundly emotional experienceโ of meeting โsome little children whose fathers had been killed in conflict with Palestiniansโ โ even though he never met with such children.
From when he said heโd faithfully defend the Constitution, nine years ago, to when he told a bunch of kids at Georgetown that America was simply paying for the Crusades, last winter, Bill Clinton says bizarre and deceitful things because Bill Clinton is bizarre and deceitful.
By the way, contrast this with, for example, the liberal fixation on โBushismsโ โ the mangled malapropisms of Bush-speak. Thereโs no defending against the accusation that President Bush occasionally butchers the English language more than a New York cabbie. But how far does that take you? People know what he means and, more importantly, that he means what he says. But for some reason the Slate types (their new editor Jake Weisberg collects โBushismsโ) believe that Bushโs inability to articulate precisely what he believes is somehow more damning than Bill Clintonโs genius at articulating things he doesnโt believe. Better to have a clarity of expression of oneโs moral confusion, says Ivy League liberalism, than to have confusion of expression of oneโs moral clarity.
Anyway, thatโs a fight for another day. Back to Bill Clinton: host of โPress the Meat.โ First of all, Peggy Noonan is right. Heโs too lazy to do a daily TV show of any kind. Itโs just too much work.
So, what if he does it? Well, the most likely scenario is that heโd do a weekly Charlie Rose-type show, with big-name eggheads and authors. Of course, the assumption here is that Bill would shut up long enough to let Sean Wilentz or Douglas Brinkley tell him how great he is. His producers would have to yell in his ear that he needs to let the guests talk, which would result in his trademarked self-deprecation, โEnough about me, what do you think of me?โ
But letโs assume thatโs possible. If he had serious people on, talking about serious things, I can guarantee you that Clinton would get himself into trouble almost every week. Heโd be telling Noam Chomsky that he stands shoulder to shoulder with him about the evils of corporate fascism, only to return the following week to declare that thereโs not an inch of daylight between him and Milton Friedman.
Now, if itโs a daytime Oprah-style thing, as some people are reporting, he will either be very good or very bad at it. If heโs very good โ weeping at dyslexic kids who canโt take the SAT in the allotted time, getting outraged over husbands who leave the toilet seat up โ people wonโt say, โDang! this guy really was a great president!โ Theyโll say, โDang, he should have been doing this all along!โ Which is something even the most committed Clinton foe can agree with wholeheartedly.
In fact, Iโm perfectly comfortable saying that Bill Clinton has what it takes to make a great TV host if heโs willing to put in the effort. Heโs a smart guy; heโs a good talker; he fakes sincerity better than Paul Begala, Bill Press, Sam Donaldson, and Geraldo Rivera combined; and, oh yeah, he has important hair. Heโs certainly less self-absorbed than, say, Bill Maher, and heโs probably funnier too.
Indeed, itโs a mistake to assume that someone who made a bad president would necessarily be bad at other things. All the talk about how Clinton was โneither above the law nor below the lawโ and how โif they can do this to the president they can do this to anyone,โ always missed the fundamental point. Nobody would do โthisโ (whatever โthisโ was) to anyone but the president, because the president isnโt like anybody else. He should be held to a higher standard. Clinton may not have met the standards of a good president, but itโs unfair to him to say he doesnโt meet the far lower standards of a daytime talk-show host.
And, besides, I could be wrong. He might be terrible at it. He might get bogged down trying to make housewives understand that the Blue Light Special at K-Mart is really the culmination of the globalization process set forth by his administration. He might become obsessed with defending his presidency as a bulwark against Newt Gingrichโs hordes, while most of the people in the audience are saying โNewt who?โ
And if that happens, thereโs plenty of upside there. First, heโll be canceled. But, even better, such a debacle will underscore the true lesson of his presidency: that it was all about him. So let him have his โMe-Watch.โ It might even be worth tuning in to.






Comments