Voting for Some Excitement in 2008

I’m getting all tingly just thinking about it -- and I’m not one who easily tingles.

Like many of you, I’ve grown so accustomed over the years to accepting second-rate fare that I’ve quit thinking big. Why dare to dream when we so often get disappointed? We wait all year for the World Series and the Florida Marlins show up. We want a great Super Bowl and get the Carolina Panthers. We yearn for “Huntley-Brinkley” but end up with “Hannity & Colmes.”

And now, tell the truth, does a Kerry-Bush presidential race strike you as the best we can do? People thought Bush-Gore in 2000 was uninspiring; will this be any better? Well, Bush-Gore was better than Ford-Carter in ‘76, but what a standard.

Beaten down by such realities, I hadn’t paid much attention to the chatter about amending the Constitution to let foreign-born citizens run for president. I could take or leave the idea, but, sure, why not? It’s driven by pro-Schwarzenegger forces, but that’s OK. I can’t think of a reason why The Big Guv shouldn’t be allowed to run for president.

Then, it hit me. We Americans have a chance to have the most stimulating presidential election in 200 years.

While we’re amending the part of Article II that relates to foreign-born presidential wannabes, we should also repeal the 22nd Amendment, which prohibits a president from serving more than two terms.

Are you tingling now? If both amendments pass, here’s your potential 2008 presidential marquee: Arnold Schwarzenegger versus Bill Clinton.

Duel of the titans. Icon versus Icon. The Man From Hope versus the Terminator. Two men who know how to enjoy a fine cigar. A presidential campaign that would captivate the country and the world.

One without the other would be interesting; together, they’re dynamite.

It’s not that far-fetched. If President Bush defeats John Kerry this fall, the White House race will be wide open in 2008. With the two-term limit scrapped and Clinton in, Republicans would be forced to turn to Schwarzenegger over Bush to take on Clinton.

In the past, computers created dream matchups of boxers from different eras, like Muhammad Ali and Joe Louis. It was the closest we could get to answer what-ifs that could never be known.

With Clinton-Schwarzenegger, we wouldn’t have to speculate. It would be the heavyweight championship for politicians.

Compared to Clinton-Schwarzenegger, Bush-Kerry is a warmup act.

Schwarzenegger and Clinton know how to sell tickets.

In four years, neither man would be past his prime. In August 2008, Clinton would turn 62 and be only 12 months older than Schwarzenegger. Clinton would campaign on the success of his presidency, with the likelihood that Gov. Schwarzenegger, coming off a reelection win in 2006, would tout his record.

But it would be as much about star power as politics. And that’s before we toss Hillary and Maria into the mix. It would be the best presidential matchup since Adams-Jefferson II in 1800. No more Bush-Dukakis or Reagan-Mondale.

Clinton-Schwarzenegger also would be the cleanest campaign ever. You think either of them would bring up the sexual peccadilloes of the other? No chance. They could put the presidential debates on Pay-Per-View and make a fortune.

People who never cared about politics would engage. How does 90% turnout on election day grab you?

This sounds like political fancy, but it’s not.

Let’s start working on those amendments.

Let’s get this country excited again.

Just think of it, an entire country tingling.

*

Dana Parsons’ column

appears Wednesdays, Fridays and Sundays. He can be reached at (714) 966-7821, at dana.parsons@latimes.com or at The Times’ Orange County edition, 1375 Sunflower Ave., Costa Mesa, CA 92626.