We haven’t seen any aggressive campaigning for John Kerry on the part of Bill and Hillary Clinton this year. This, of course, is in part due to Bill’s bypass surgery, which has confined him to no heavy lifting (read “no dating”) and limited travel.

Hillary has been going through the motions for Kerry, but the woman who is the human equivalent of an ice-water enema may have other motives – as does her husband. Bill and Hillary may not do much together, but they do agree on taking over the world, and with a potential John Kerry loss, they could be only four short years away from doing just that.

When Kofi Annan steps down as U.N. secretary general in 2006, rumors are 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. As U.N. secretary general, Clinton would also finally have a shot at a Nobel Peace Prize. Until he wins one, Clinton will always feel empty and out of place – like a Little Rock fireplace mantle without a bowling trophy on it.

For those who aren’t too adept at math or chemistry, being a U.N. suck-up is the next best way to win a Nobel prize. Kofi Annan and the United Nations won the Nobel in 2001. The following year, it was won by Jimmy Carter, one of the United Nation’s favorite locksteppers, and the ex-president whose instruction manual for dealing with despots involves only two simple steps:

  1. Drop pants.

  2. Bend over.

The Nobel folks would now very much like to give the prize to Clinton so they can begin marketing their “Great Appeasers” line of “Precious Moments” figurines.

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. 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 – perhaps something like a scheme to subdivide Madagascar, plunk down doublewides, and land-flip the property values to an artificially astronomical number – Castle Grande with lemurs. Profits from that operation, among others, will go to fund Hillary’s presidential campaign in 2008.

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” – 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 – two at Afghanistan, two at Sudan and the one documented in the Starr Report.

By spelling out how a Kerry loss could mean the Clintons ruling the world, I, by no means, am suggesting anybody vote for Kerry. Electing a man who’s against outsourcing anything, except national security, would simply hasten the mess.

With a Bush win, we’ll not only be safer for four more years, but it will also give us more time to figure out how to combat the Lex Luthor-style plans of the Clintons. Think about it … someday Hillary could be president, and Bill could be running the United Nations, hosting dinners as international dignitaries look at the china and ask, “How come this says ‘Property of the White House’ on it?”

Hillary soon could be writing the questions for the global test, and Bill will be answering them. What could possibly go wrong?

Note: Read our discussion guidelines before commenting.