Bill Clinton: A dangerous surrogate

last updated 8 January 2015

With friends like Bill Clinton, Barack Obama better watch his back, said Sam Youngman in Reuters.com. While fund-raising and campaigning as Obama’s No. 1 surrogate, the popular former president last week “went off message” on several critical issues, “leaving Democrats fuming.” First, Clinton used a national TV interview to praise Mitt Romney’s business career as “sterling,” and defended the work of venture-capital firms—directly contradicting a key Obama line of attack. Clinton also suggested that the country was still in a recession, and spoke of extending the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy. You could practically hear Obama’s campaign team howling in anguish. Everyone has a theory why the Big Dog causes these commotions, said John Dickerson in Slate.com. Some say he is deliberately sandbagging Obama, his rival for Democrats’ affections. Others suspect he’s hoping to boost Romney into an economically disastrous presidency, so that Hillary can claim the White House in 2016.

“Asking ‘why’ of Bill Clinton is a sucker’s game,” said Jonah Goldberg in BostonHerald.com. He’s apologized for his gaffes, insisting he’s “aghast” at any suggestion that he wants Obama to lose. But as we’ve learned, a Clinton reply is the “verbal equivalent of an ice sculpture: impressive, but not expected to last long in the light of day.” The only reliable truth about the man is that he has lots of complex motives—all of them self-serving. If you doubt that, consider what “surrogate” Clinton said at an Obama fund-raiser last week, said Kyle Smith in the New York Post. “Remember me?” Clinton said. “I’m the only guy that gave you four surplus budgets out of the eight I sent.” Ouch. In other words: “four more than Obama will ever deliver.”

Clinton’s problem is that he fancies himself the country’s foremost political consultant, said Bob Shrum in TheDailyBeast.com. But over the years, his counsel has been “hardly infallible.” In 2000, he kept trying to steal attention from presidential candidate Al Gore, but Clinton’s “personal negatives” in that post-Lewinsky era helped cost Gore the election. In 2004, Clinton divided John Kerry’s campaign with his unsolicited meddling, and in 2008, he damaged Hillary’s presidential bid with his unsettling, racially tinged attacks on Obama in South Carolina. So, Mr. President, continue to give advice, “but not in the media.” Then there will be no reason to think: With friends like Bill Clinton…