Ever since Tuesday’s election returns started coming in, the Democrats are now more motivated than ever, and have broad aspirations. Among the pool of Dems, none are more excited than Bill and Hillary Clinton.
Their sights are now set on ruling the world, quasi-literally.
Kofi AnnanÃ‚Â is steppingÃ‚Â down as U.N. secretary general in December, and rumorsÃ‚Â have long existedÃ‚Â that Bill Clinton wants the position. Clinton may soon get his first job since leaving the White House that didn’t involve having his secretary “whistle when Hillary’s coming.”
There’s a good possibility that Bill Clinton would be successful in his quest to run the United Nations, since the two go together like globalist peanut butter and adulterous jelly.
From the moment he’s sworn in as secretary general of the United Nations in 2006, Clinton could put a bunch of wacky proposals on the table, which would then lay in wait for Hillary’s stamp of approval as U.S. president in 2008, under the nightmarish presumption that she’s elected, which, given Tuesday’s results, seems more real and less nighmare.
To kill some time and raise some funds until Hillary is in place, they could display a new twist on some of their familiar business acumen Ã¢â‚¬â€œ perhaps something like a scheme to subdivide Madagascar, plunk down doublewides, and land-flip the property values to an artificially astronomical number Ã¢â‚¬â€œ Castle Grande with lemurs. Profits from that operation, among others, will go to fund Hillary’s presidential campaign in 2008.
Some wave off as ridiculous the idea of Bill Clinton heading up the U.N. I’ve read that, under UN bylaws, the Secretary General may not be from a country with a seat on the Security Council. Sure, that might be what they say, but, as history has taught us, rules are made to be broken. I don’t know if it’s really in there, as I’ve never read the U.N. bylaws because I’ve never been that bored.
When you consider that Bill Clinton has some people believing that heÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s the Ã¢â‚¬Å“first black president of the U.S.,” is a simple renovation of a U.N. charter bylaw anything but a minor detail?
Then there’s Hillary.
From Hillary’s side of the equation, she’ll be running on her husband’s record as president, reminding Americans how much safer we were in those days. How might a Hillary Clinton administration deal with terrorism and despotism? Probably in a way eerily similar to how her husband handled it.
Your enemies usually won’t want to harm you if they’re profiting from the relationship. This method of governmental protection is “security by mutual extortion” Ã¢â‚¬â€œ an under-the-table quasi-free market system that provides open communists abroad, and closet Marxists at home, with a way to practice guilt-free capitalism without publicly compromising their principles.
Presumably, Hillary’s administration would pick up right where her husband left off, when “keeping us safe” only meant that the Chinese weren’t about to nuke Washington, D.C., with half of Beijing crashing in the Lincoln Bedroom, state checkbook in hand.
The Clintons are always saying, in essence, that we were safer when Bill Clinton was president. If Hillary runs, they’ll ask Americans if they want to go back to those peaceful times when there were only five destructive missiles launched in eight years Ã¢â‚¬â€œ two at Afghanistan, two at Sudan and the one documented in the Starr Report.
Think about it. Hillary soon could be writing the questions for the global test, and BillÃ‚Â could be answering them. What could possibly go wrong?
Note: If you’re seeing only this post, the entire blog can be accessed at DougPowers.com