Bill Clinton is the favourite candidate for the office of Chancellor of Oxford University. He is facing growing opposition from dons who fear that his election would endanger the reputation of the institution and the virtue of its undergraduates.
The arguments against his candidacy are many and varied:
- The former President of the United States would harm “the dignity of the office” as Mr Clinton’s sexual peccadilloes, including his affair with Monica Lewinsky, render him unsuitable for such a prestigious post
- His lies on oath about the Lewinsky affair and his decision to award presidential pardons to a number of well-connected criminals just before he left office in January 2001 should disqualify him from the role.
- Mr Clinton’s patchy academic record hasn’t been particularly distinguished in any field – he went to Oxford as a Rhodes scholar in 1968 but failed to complete his degree and his extensive commitments in America.
Mark Almond, a fellow of Oriel College and a lecturer in 20th-century history, added that Mr Clinton would face “endless allegations of sexual scandal”.
“There’s bound to be trouble…We need a woman chancellor, not a womanising chancellor.”
As far as I know, the main argument for is Mr Clinton’s fundraising abilities. Since leaving office he has embarked on a series of lucrative foreign tours, giving lectures for a reputed £1,200 a minute. Oxford University being starved of state funds and facing transatlantic competition for its academics, grossly underpaid in the British academia, is desparate for more cash. And I suppose some dons are reasoning – if he brings more money, sod the dignity of the office or the potential damage it may do to the university’s image.
I can see how that happened – during my university days we came to appreciate the unique tutorial system at Oxford that the government has been threatening to scrap as it is five times more expensive per student than the usual seminar/lecture style of university education. Both Oxford and Cambridge are constantly under attack for their allegedly ‘elitist’ admissions policies and forced to fulfill quotas for students from ‘state’ schools.
I do have a problem with Clinton being the next Chancellor of Oxford University. I also want the university to raise enough funds to continue in its distinguished tradition, without the need to force change because of a lack of them. However, there must be better candidates for the post, both morally and academically more accomplished as well as able to attract sufficient funds for this ancient institution.
Ah, the US’ loss is the UK’s gain.
(That IS a one-way ticket to the UK, right?!)
Clinton’s speech rates tanked since the Marc Rich pardon, and are still falling. I thought Woy was a very suitable figure for Chancellor of Oxford. He was a scholar and a leading politician, despite some of his barmy views. Clinton, on the other hand, has few scholastic credentials to recommend him. While Thatcher will probably never get the post, I think the university could do far worse than Shirley Williams, who’s spent at least the past 5-10 years lecturing at universities on both sides of the Atlantic.
In the USA, there are persistent rumors that Slick Willie was asked to leave Oxford after being accused of rape by an Eileen Wellstone, a 19-year old student he met in a pub. When her parents did not press charges, he was allowed to merely depart the hallowed precincts with no public scandal.
Are these the same people who laughed at the US for obsessing about impeachment?
(no sarcasm)
Who cares who he shagged (is shagging, will shag). That just shows he’s a horny guy who took advantage of opportunities offered. Besides with Hillary Macbeth doing the home cooking, who wouldn’t eat out?
On t’other hand, he’s a socialist, a casual unrepentant murderer (remember that pill factory in Sudan?) and a one-braincell smarmy git with no significant redeeming features save eventual mortality. Now THAT’s a reason to say “no”.
“Lewinsky” is now a noun in America as in get out the cigar to take a ride hun’ while you Lewinsky my knob…
And I don’t care…
But he lied about it and that’s perjury and they pulled his law license and explicitly forbid him from arguing cases before the Supreme Court for that reason.
You want him? Just make sure you greet the whoremonger with a box of cigars.
I think Bill would make an excellent chancellor. After all he has all the right qualifications. By the way isn’t a womaniser a man who enjoys bedding women? I think we used to call that a man.