Rumors are now swirling that New York Governor may choose a “caretaker” Senator for Hillary Clinton’s seat, as was also diligently reported below by our Editor-in-Chief. In general, this strikes me as a sound plan (and far better than looking at Carolyn Kennedy) but a more alarming prospect would be the idea of Bill Clinton as the caretaker in question.

The former president is among several boldface names being touted as possible “caretakers” for New York’s Senate seat — people who would serve until the 2010 elections but wouldn’t be interested in running to keep the job.

As the process of picking Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton’s replacement gets messier, the option may become increasingly attractive to Gov. David Paterson, who has sole authority to name a successor.

This choice, should it be made, would have to go down in history as one of the greatest examples of leaping out of the frying pan and into the fire. It’s difficult to even begin listing the reasons why this would be a terrible choice, even if President Clinton were interested in doing it. At the top of such a list would surely be the fact that New York, like the rest of the states, deserves two serious, dedicated Senators doing the state’s work in the upper chamber without derailing the entire process. Clinton would be an immediate distraction and sideshow, sucking all of the air out of the room and turning efforts at serious work into a media sideshow.

Also, one of the chief objections to Caroline Kennedy (among many) is that we really don’t need dynasties running our Federal government. Picking Clinton yet again for such an influential position would send exactly the wrong message. There is also a question of appearances of propriety. Do we really want someone in an influential Legislative position who is married to the Secretary of State? (A position which is a key role in the Executive Branch.) There are already questions swirling about Bill’s library contributions and other financial activity as they relate to Hillary’s assumed upcoming role in the State Department. Shall we compound those conflict-of-interest questions by putting her husband in the Senate?

Lastly, why would Bill Clinton, already having finished an amazingly successful story arc to the peak of political power, want to return – even for a couple of years – to be one of one-hundred members of the U.s. Senate? He has done his part and moved on to a new role in private life and charitable efforts. Such a story line could be cut short if Bill Clinton would step up to the microphone this weekend and politely state that he is flattered to be considered but is not interested in the job. Please, Bill. Turn it down. You’ve done your time and many of us greatly appreciate your service, but it’s time for some new blood. Just say no, Bill. Please?