I was always a big fan of President Clinton. When he made his first run for the presidency, I was only in eighth grade, but nevertheless very interested in politics. When I watched him in debates and forums, he seemed like a political godsend to a young Democrat-in-training. His ideas on abortion rights, education, gays in the military, everything, it all seemed so perfect, like he would be an ideal leader for the nation.

Now, nine years later, I, like many of his supporters, realize that everything he said sounded so perfect because Clinton is the purest of political animals: He tailors his viewpoints to whom he’s targeting.

After 1995’s devastating Republican overthrow in Congress, Clinton quickly went to the center, shedding a lot of the values Democratic purists had been so attracted to during his first presidential run. Before that, he had already disappointed by not really following through on his promise to lift the ban on gays in the military, and his health-care ideas, while well intended, never even got off the ground.

But still I defended him, if nothing else because, despite his much maligned “character flaws,” Clinton still seemed so much more noble than his Republican detractors, power-hungry opportunists. I supported him through Gennifer, Paula and yes, even Monica, because I remembered the enthusiasm, intelligence and heart he had during his campaigning.

I supported and defended Clinton while he went through his embarrassing impeachment ordeal, because, once again ,it was simply a case of his enemies trying to smear his name for their own benefit.

But the recent decision by an Arkansas Supreme Court that Clinton, who was once the attorney general of Arkansas and taught law there, be disbarred for lying about his sexual relations with that woman, Monica Lewinsky, gave me pause.

It’s obvious that the majority of Americans are pretty happy with the way the country’s being run, even if they don’t like the man who’s running it. True, Clinton’s possibly being disbarred doesn’t stem from any shocking new developments about the presidents; it’s just the same old garbage that everyone’s been tired of hearing about anyway.

But the news of the proposed disbarment made me reconsider exactly how I feel about this president whom I once so admired. It’s funny that now, after all the impeachment dust has settled, that I would reconsider my stand on Clinton.

I still don’t think he should have been impeached. I think lying about a mistake, especially if it’s an embarrassing sexual mistake, is somewhat forgivable. But I agree with the Arkansas Court — Clinton should never be able to practice law in this country. Not after the example he’s set.

I realize this logic sounds contradictory: Someone isn’t fit to hold a laywer’s license but is morally fit to be the leader of the Free World. However, the impeachment charges were largely thrown together as the Republicans’ last-ditch effort to embarrass the president … mission accomplished.

Clinton’s lying was repugnant, but not as much as the Republicans’ desire to gain from someone’s bad judgment, especially when so many of them had equally mortifying skeletons in their closets.

It wouldn’t have been right, especially when the majority of the country was so against the idea, for Clinton to be removed from office. His censure was his public humiliation.

But there’s no getting around the fact that Clinton basically lied in a court of law about his relationship with Lewinsky. Lying in a court of law isn’t acceptable for a lawyer who wants to keep his license.

Of course, Clinton has said he’ll appeal the decision to the Supreme Court, but it’s not believable that his legalistic arguments are going to save him forever.

Clinton got off pretty lucky in January 1999. He should just count his blessings and accept his disbarment.

Lord knows he’ll probably have his work cut out for him raising money for his presidential library, and it’s not like he was planning on practicing law again anyway. Who knows, he might be a Senate Spouse — if Hillary lets him in her house.

Taking this punishment would help Clinton maintain the little bit of integrity he has left. Maybe doing this would keep him from being seen as a complete failure in the eyes of history.

The most disappointing thing about Bill Clinton is realizing how much hope many people had for him, for his potential to be a good leader.

I’ve come to the realization that it will be a relief when he’s gone.

---

Kate Kompas is a junior in journalism and mass communication from LeClaire. She is editor in chief of the Daily.