Now that the impeachment trial of President Clinton has come to an unfortunate conclusion, we are suddenly faced with the even more unfortunate spectacle of listening to pundits speculate that Hillary Rodham Clinton would be an ideal candidate for the New York Senate seat that will be vacated by Daniel Patrick Moynihan in 2000. I say unfortunate because this is not a prospect that ought to be entertained for even a moment. In fact, if we were not a political system so warped that a President's approval rating now goes up every time he is involved in a scandal, I doubt that we would be considering this notion as serious.

Hillary Clinton was the primary proponent of the 1993 attempt to place the health care system of our country under the control of the federal government. She apparently believes that we should take one of the things that the United States does better than any other country in the world, and place it under governmental control, so that we can be more in line with those nations that do not have the best system in the world. And let us not forget that while Ms. Clinton has won considerable sympathy from well-meaning but misguided people for being married to Bill Clinton, she has been more than just a "victim" of his wrongdoings, she has been his primary enabler. She has always saved her strongest criticism for those who have attempted to hold Mr. Clinton accountable for his misdeeds. Let us not forget that she referred to those who were pursuing the (absolutely credible) charges of perjury and obstruction against the president as tools of a "right-wing conspiracy". This from a women who has constantly been praised by the leftist sycophants who comprise the majority of our media for the "grace and dignity" with which she has handled this scandal!

Do you think that any of the people who are touting her as a candidate for Senator from New York (most of these people, incidentally,live elsewhere!) would be heaping praise upon the late Pat Nixon if she had referred to those seeking to remove President Nixon from office as part of a "left-wing" conspiracy? She probably would have been dismissed as a "right-wing nut", not lauded as a person who should be seeking a high political office herself. The fact is that nothing that she has ever done would indicate that she is a suitable candidate for national office. She has never held any political office. She is also the only First Lady to be subject to a federal investigation for wrongdoing committed while serving as First Lady. Finally, while her outspoken defense of President Clinton's actions may be seen by the naive as indicative of an admirable loyalty to her husband, they are in fact an indication that she does not believe that those who share her beliefs ought to be held to the same ethical standard as those who do not.

During the Watergate scandal, Ms. Clinton, who was a recent law school graduate at the time, worked for the investigating committee. In more recent years, she was a strong supporter of the independent counsel statute. Now she expresses reservations about the law, due to the alleged excesses of Kenneth Starr. The reality is that she, as a lifelong liberal, is irked that a piece of legislation that Democrats enacted for use against Republican presidents is now being used against one of "her people".

The fact is, Ms Clinton, rather than considering a run for another office, should simply exit public life, relieved that the independent counsel was not able to find any incriminating evidence against her in regard to her dealings in Whitewater, Travelgate, and Filegate. The last scandal is especially revealing as regards the hypocrisy of Ms. Clinton. I can imagine the righteous indignation that she would have felt if it had been discovered that the Nixon administration had her name on a special list of known opponents of the administration. However, it is apparently acceptable for this practice to be undertaken by a Democratic president. The double standard practiced by many of the same Democrats who called for Nixon's removal, yet steadfastly defended the President, is appalling, and there is no stronger proponent of this double standard than the First Lady.

There is no doubt that if Ms. Clinton were to run for the Senate, she would attract a considerable amount of support, especially from those who sympathize with her because of her relationship with the most scandal ridden president in recent memory. However, it is clearly misguided sympathy, as Ms. Clinton has not been a victim of the President's improprieties, but rather, the Enabler-in-Chief.