Thursday on the campaign trail, former President Bill Clinton finally let the cat out of the bag about the Clintons’ views on economics. Speaking about solutions to global warming, Clinton announced that we “just have to slow down our economy and cut back our greenhouse emissions” in order to save the planet from the complete and total annihilation that will surely happen from climate change.

Whether or not you believe global warming is a manmade problem (I don’t think there is enough evidence), this statement should raise a red flag about how liberal Democrats look at the United States as the most powerful economy in the world: Economic growth is inherently wrong. So much of the intense dislike the Clintons have for prosperity via the free market is revealed in Bill Clinton’s enlightening comment.

The timing of the statement is particularly puzzling, considering Congress and the current president are preparing a stimulus package (admittedly a dubious one) to jumpstart the dragging economy. Now Bill Clinton is telling voters, presumably to help his wife gain support, the economy needs to slow down more? This doesn’t jibe with Hillary Clinton’s probable support for the current stimulus package nor her recent unveiling of another $70 billion stimulus package — God forbid — if she becomes president. Furthermore, it just seems un-American for a former president, or anyone for that matter, telling Americans that we should stop growing our economy. After all, Americans love to create, innovate, engage in business and, yes, have a job.

This leads me to believe that Bill Clinton’s vocalized desire for a slowed down economy was a political Freudian slip. We have heard countless times from Clinton supporters about how great the economic growth of the ‘90s was, thanks to Bubba and company. Now, in the name of global warming, he says we should slow it down to save the earth. You might expect such blatantly anti-capitalist rhetoric from Leonard DiCaprio, but not from a Clinton, who would never say anything even potentially damaging politically. Right?

Except Bill Clinton has already done that before in this campaign. Just last week, after it became clear Barack Obama would win South Carolina by a considerable margin, Clinton made the infamous non sequitur comparing this win to those of Jesse Jackson in 1984 and 1988. To be honest, however, it really shouldn’t surprise anyone who has paid attention to the political history of the Clintons; this is a team that will insinuate and propagate anything if it helps politically.

Perhaps this latest statement from Clinton was aiming to do just that. It certainly makes the Clintons seem more aware of a Democratic niche issue, that they “get” the hipness that is global warming activism. Nevertheless, the clarion call to slow economic growth in the United States can be added to the long list of Clinton statements (mostly from Hillary Clinton) that indicate a less-than-sympathetic opinion toward stimulating the economy.

Remember that Hillary is the candidate who “[wants] to take those profits” from oil companies to spend on government research for alternative energy. She’s threatened to take money away from taxpayers to spend on “the common good.” She even lamented as First Lady that “the unfettered free market has been the most radically destructive force in American life in the last generation.”

Compared to this radicalism, Bill Clinton’s uninspiring charge to slow down the economy is relatively tame. Then again, he was always better than his wife was at glossing over the ugly parts to make “socialism” sound like “helpin’ each other out.” Because it hinders their ability to make a case for their government help programs, the Clintons hate economic growth. I’m just surprised Hillary Clinton has let this latest indicative comment slip through.

--Mike Warren is a sophomore in the College of Arts and Science. He can be reached at michael.r.warren@vanderbilt.edu