Clinton Legacy: "a presidency about nothing" ie S

[Marco Zee]

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articl ... ffens.html

Excerpt: Republicans Back on the Offensive
By Robert Tracinski

The only good thing about North Korea's nuclear test--aside from the fact that it may have been a dud--is the fact that it has broken the spell of the past two weeks' 1990s re-enactment.

I enjoy a good "Seinfeld" episode as much as the next guy, but in hindsight, the famous "show about nothing"--"Seinfeld" always obsessed over the minutiae of life--was a benign symptom of the more ominous underlying affliction of its era: the refusal to face up to the big issues of world events and to take the difficult and unpopular actions necessary to head off looming threats.

The Clinton administration was the ultimate "show about nothing," particularly during its seedy final phase, when the nation was so transfixed by the ugly details of the president's personal life that most people failed to notice the nation was at war......

Therefore, the author annoints the Clinton legacy as " a Presidency about nothing" or the "Seinfeld Presidency", with which, I cannot agree more.

[mcelrah]

Lessee, Clinton:
- balanced the budget and put it in surplus to pay off the debt, which Bush immediately screwed up
- put North Korea in its box with the framework agreement, which Bush immediately screwed up, with this week's predictable results
- made a bona fide effort for an Israeli-Palestinian settlement, an arena where Bush has done nothing, with predictable results
- sent 70 Tomahawks to Bin Laden's camp in Afghanistan, missing him by minutes
- kept Iraq in its box for 8 years, successfully, as it turns out, keeping Saddam from developing WMD
- punished Saddam for a plot on Daddy Bush's life by bombing Mukhabarat (Iraqi National Security) headquarters
- took a major initiative to protect national forest and wilderness areas from mindless road-building, logging and development, which Bush has done his best to dismantle, in keeping with the Republican desire to turn our entire landmass into a vast wasteland of strip malls and cookie-cutter tract housing
- made progress on trade liberalization, while the Doha Round has foundered on Bush's watch in large part because of lack of leadership
- steered the U.S. to a high point of prestige and good-will, which Bush has completely squandered, such that most Latin Americans would rather vote for that Venezuelan buffoon Chavez to have a seat on the UN Security Council than be seen to side with the U.S. in favor of Guatemala

I could go on. Pretty substantive, in spite of the irresponsible Republican effort to impeach Clinton for what were decidedly low crimes not contemplated by the impeachment clause of the Constitution, far less serious than Bush's unconstitutional monitoring of U.S. citizens' communications without judicial review, indefinite detention of U.S. citizens without access to court review, and embrace of torture. The current presidency has a been a disaster for the nation. The only hope is that is will finally prove disastrous for the Party of Organized Greed (GOP spelled backwards) with its record of out-and-out corruption, venality, hypocrisy, and irresponsibility. - Hugh

[mcelrah]

Oh, and I forgot to mention "incompetence". - Hugh

[Marco Zee]

Hugh, if those are the HIGHLIGHTS of his administration, you are basically making the case that Clinton's presidency really was about NOTHING. Thanks.
Any other Clinton-philes want to take a stab at enumerating his substantive accomplishments?

Marco

[mcelrah]

Oh really? Let's see your guy's record of accomplishment:

balanced budget even two presidential terms in the future? - nope

caught Bin Laden? - nope

Iraq? - fiasco!

North Korean nukes? - abject failure!

Iranian nuclear program? - shootin' blanks

U.S power and influence in the world - drastically diminished

real wages - flat

There's a Hippocratic oath for politicians too - "first, do no harm".

This guy will go down in history as among the very worst chief executives in U.S. history! - Hugh

[brianvh]

Ummm....Marco....isn't a major conservative plank the idea that a government should be largely 'hands off'? Clinton downsized government spending, opened free trade and encouraged it by making America less unpopular around the world because people felt they could actually communicate with him, that (in contrast to the present adminstration) he was mentally capable of understanding them.

What's your boy done? After suffering an outrageous attack that for a spell gained us the sympathy of the world, we are now more reviled than ever. Nice job.

[Marco Zee]

Hugh, if those are the HIGHLIGHTS of his administration, you are basically making the case that Clinton's presidency really was about NOTHING. Thanks. I will expound on your points shortly.

Any other Clinton-philes want to take a stab at enumerating his substantive accomplishments? Joe, Marc, Gary, Christy, Matthew. others???

Holding my breath here in anticipation..........

[deveil]

http://www.thefreedomtoast.com/audio/clip_blameo.mp3

[Matthew]

Bill Clinton was the best damned Republican President this county has ever had--

Opened free trade all over the world-- NAFTA

Signed the Defense of Marriage Bill banning Gay Marriage

Enacted Welfare Reform

Kept our troops home except as a last resort.

Streamlined Government-- not the crazy Bush system of expanding Government.

Kept the Government out of people's business

Balanced the Budget

Oversaw a soaring economy

Kept inflation down and brought down interest rates

Created jobs in the US-- not CHINA.

No wonder the Republicans hate him. He was able to do everything that they promised but couldn't deliver.

Too bad there aren't more Republicans like Bill Clinton!!!!

[Marco Zee]

Alright Matthew....You WIN the grand prize for this thread !!!

Clinton's GREATEST achievements were all Republican initiatives, namely NAFTA, Welfare Reform, Defense of Marriage, and the Balanced Budget Amendment (part of the Contract with America).

If it weren't for the Republican takeover of Congress in 1994, Clinton would have accomplished practically nothing of substance. He failed on National Healthcare when he had a democrat House and Senate in 93-94.

Clinton inherited a growing and rebounding economy from Bush 41, and left office with a floundering, recessing economy, as evidenced by the tech bubble burst and 1998 Nasdaq crash, and that's the principle reason Gore lost the election. Of course, Bill, as usual, takes credit for the good, and blames others for the bad economic news during his tenure.

Does anyone remember the knock down drag out fight between Gore and Clinton, as each blamed the other for losing the 2000 election.....Gore blamed Clinton for all of his political garbage and shenanigans, and Clinton criticized Gore for being a robotic candidate who lost the debates with Bush 43. What a fitting end to a "nothing" Presidency.

Marco

[Matthew]

You can't have it both ways Marco. Either Clinton did stuff or he didn't. He did a lot as you have mentioned. It comes from something called cooperation and looking at all sides of an issue, something the current admin doesn't undertand.

Matthew
PS Thanks Marco for your support of Bill Clinton. But no thanks to your continued support of Stalinist Communist ideas and the sending off of our troops into a senseless slaughter. RED is also the color of the blood on all of the hands of the people who continue to support admin's actions in Iraq.

[Marco Zee]

Matthew,
Clinton definitely did "stuff"....it was just all SMALL POTATOES, 2ND AND 3RD TIER stuff....and those are his HIGHLIGHTS !!!! And his "greatest" accomplishments, as listed earlier, were all GOP initiatives. History will be hard-pressed to find any "truly great" achievements of Slick Willy. So he will be most infamous for getting impeached over the Monica thing.

He had several opportunities to do great things, especially with his political skills and "popularity", but he declined to do so, for a variety of reasons. So he literally "blew" his chance for greatness, which is what his legacy will ultimately be-come. LOL. ( I just made this up myself....not bad eh?)

I did support Clinton when he was doing the "right thing"....too bad more Dems don't support GOP initiatives like Bill did then, and Joe & Ed do now.

Marco

[mcelrah]

And what, pray tell has Shrub accomplished?

- Social Security? - nope
- Medicare? - didn't even shake a stick at it
- immigration reform? - well, we did get a 700 mile fence (snort!)
- counterproliferation? - three words: Iran, North Korea
- counterterrorism? - see latest National Intelligence Estimate - "cause celebre"
- Israel-Palestine? - didn't even try
- Iraq? - snatched defeat from the jaws of victory
- I'll give him this one: he saved Americans from dangerous Canadian prescription drugs (snort!)
- planned (!) deficits into the next two presidential terms and beyond
- another positive accomplishment: drove the Republican party into the dirt

- Hugh

[Flying Lobster]

And what, pray tell has Shrub accomplished?

- Social Security? - nope
- Medicare? - didn't even shake a stick at it
- immigration reform? - well, we did get a 700 mile fence (snort!)
- counterproliferation? - three words: Iran, North Korea
- counterterrorism? - see latest National Intelligence Estimate - "cause celebre"
- Israel-Palestine? - didn't even try
- Iraq? - snatched defeat from the jaws of victory
- I'll give him this one: he saved Americans from dangerous Canadian prescription drugs (snort!)
- planned (!) deficits into the next two presidential terms and beyond
- another positive accomplishment: drove the Republican party into the dirt

- Hugh

The measure of true leadership--when the going gets tough--blame someone else.

Marco, when you going to pull your head out of Clinton's ass? No matter how much crap you find up there, it will never make someone screwing up in the here and now look any better.

marc

[Marco Zee]

Marc said: Marco, when you going to pull your head out of Clinton's ass? No matter how much crap you find up there, it will never make someone screwing up in the here and now look any better.

Marc, with the elections only a few days away, I think it is illustrative that all the Clinton supporters on this forum cannot enumerate any GREAT ACHIEVEMENTS of BC's administration, other than the Republican initiatives that Matthew mentioned ( I'm proud of ya Matt).

And when people go to the polls in a few days, they will have a clear choice between what the Dems and GOP's offer, especially in regards to foreign policy, national defense, and counterterrorism issues.

Bush still has two years to improve upon his legacy...Bill's legacy, as discussed previously, appears anemic at best, and negligent at worst, especially with regards to the GWOT. But Bill's time has passed and he cannot change the past.....whereas Bush still has time on the clock to further enhance his legacy. I'm hoping that he makes good use of his remaining time before Jeb takes over in 2009.

Marco

[Flying Lobster]

Marc said: Marco, when you going to pull your head out of Clinton's ass? No matter how much crap you find up there, it will never make someone screwing up in the here and now look any better.

Marc, with the elections only a few days away, I think it is illustrative that all the Clinton supporters on this forum cannot enumerate any GREAT ACHIEVEMENTS of BC's administration, other than the Republican initiatives that Matthew mentioned ( I'm proud of ya Matt).

And when people go to the polls in a few days, they will have a clear choice between what the Dems and GOP's offer, especially in regards to foreign policy, national defense, and counterterrorism issues.

Bush still has two years to improve upon his legacy...Bill's legacy, as discussed previously, appears anemic at best, and negligent at worst, especially with regards to the GWOT. But Bill's time has passed and he cannot change the past.....whereas Bush still has time on the clock to further enhance his legacy. I'm hoping that he makes good use of his remaining time before Jeb takes over in 2009.

Marco

I never was a big fan of Clinton--though he's still a mother Theresa compared to GeeBubie.

Sure, the Dems are all about "Cut and Run." The Republicans have a much better solution: "Stay and Die."

Go ahead Marco and continue to celebrate death, deception, corruption and hate along with the rest of the neo-cons while you can--their days of arrogant rule shall end soon.

marc

[Marco Zee]

Sure, the Dems are all about "Cut and Run." The Republicans have a much better solution: "Stay and Die."


Marc,
I give you credit for admitting the truth about the Dems....ie Cut and Run. You are exactly correct about that.

Unfortunately, I have to disagree with you on the Republican solution, which is STAY AND WIN,....not stay and die.

So once again, you are half right....not a bad average for a baseball player.

Marco

[Marco Zee]

Here's what Bill's lib friends are saying about the Clinton's........

http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/P ... 9zlxge.asp

We know from the philosophers that a true statement is true without regard to the reliability or sagacity of the person who utters it. We have it on good authority that the truth shall set us free. David Geffen spoke truth to Maureen Dowd last week. And he may have triggered a series of events that will set the Democratic party free from its Clinton captivity.

Here is what the Hollywood mogul told the New York Times gossip columnist:

I don't think that another incredibly polarizing figure, no matter how smart she is and no matter how ambitious she is--and God knows, is there anybody more ambitious than Hillary Clinton?--can bring the country together. Obama is inspirational, and he's not from the Bush royal family or the Clinton royal family. . . .

I don't think anybody believes that in the last six years, all of a sudden Bill Clinton has become a different person. . . . I think [Republicans] believe she's the easiest to defeat. . . .

It's not a very big thing to say, "I made a mistake" on the war, and typical of Hillary Clinton that she can't. She's so advised by so many smart advisers who are covering every base . . . that machine is going to be very unpleasant and unattractive. . . .

Marc Rich getting pardoned? An oil-profiteer expatriate who left the country rather than pay taxes or face justice? Yet another time when the Clintons were unwilling to stand for the things that they genuinely believe in. Everybody in politics lies, but they do it with such ease, it's troubling.

[Joe Schad]

Marco,

In what moral system is it justified to wage a war without paying for it? Bush tormented Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., in 2004 for "voting for before voting against" funding the war. But Kerry voted for a version of the $87 billion appropriations bill that also raised revenue to pay for it. Instead, we pile the war's costs atop our mountainous national debt, leaving future generations to pay for it later -- plus interest.

We all know you are a believer, worshiper of God's Own Party (GOP) so we understand beliefs are all that matter to you, not facts. Is it an Evangelical Christain moral value system that says you can make war but not pay for it? Or is it just a Republican Moral Value system we have here?

Joe

[Marco Zee]

Marco,

In what moral system is it justified to wage a war without paying for it? Bush tormented Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., in 2004 for "voting for before voting against" funding the war. But Kerry voted for a version of the $87 billion appropriations bill that also raised revenue to pay for it. Instead, we pile the war's costs atop our mountainous national debt, leaving future generations to pay for it later -- plus interest.

Joe

Joe,
It sounds to me that you are saying it is immoral to run a budget deficit. Is that how you define morality,...whether the government expenditures exceed revenues (taxes)? Does that then mean that ALL government expenditures are immoral when there is a deficit, not just the war expenditures?

The FACT is that the Dems control Congress now (and ran deficits for more than 40 years previously), and they can balance the budget TODAY if they have the courage to cut spending (in whatever areas) or raise taxes. Bush cannot spend one cent on any government program without Congressional authorization, SO BLAME THAT IMMORAL DEM CONGRESS FOR DEFICIT SPENDING !!!!

If the Congress does not balance the budget, does that make the Dems IMMORAL ???? According to the Schad definition of morality, the Dems must be immoral since they have NO PLANS TO BALANCE THE BUDGET THIS YEAR. Nice logic Joe.

Conversely, Bill Clinton must be a moral guy since the budget was in balance in the late 90's.

Marco

[Joe Schad]

Marco, Marco, Marco.

If only you could read.

My comment was about the morallity of starting a war and not attempting to pay for it. We have never done this before, ever! BUSH and the republicans running this government for the past six year have not budgeted one dime to pay for the Iraq War. It is irresponsible, and immoral.

Could say more but I like listening to your robotic thought process. You are well programmed. The scary part is you would probably have us all exterminated if your Republican theocracy ever took over the country so you could follow "gods law".

Joe

Joe

[Marco Zee]

Joe,
The US Treasury has shelled out over $300 Billion to pay for the war in Iraq,...money that has gone to the troops and the MIC supporting the troops.
You are saying that it can be moral to start a war, but immoral not to "pay for it". I would answer that we ARE PAYING FOR IT, as evidenced by the money leaving the US Treasury.

So, to follow your reasoning, it is not immoral to start a war, but it is immoral to deficit spend to pay for it.......do I have that right?

If so, I would contend that by your same reasoning, ALL deficit spending must be immoral.

I would agree that deficit spending is unwise and certainly irresponsible, and one of the great achievements of the Republican Congress in the 90's was their determination to balance the budget, which they did.

Marco

[Flying Lobster]

...So, to follow your reasoning, it is not immoral to start a war, but it is immoral to deficit spend to pay for it.......do I have that right?

If so, I would contend that by your same reasoning, ALL deficit spending must be immoral.

Marco

That's called a sweeping generalization, Marco.

I find your thought processes and line of reasoning very disturbing.

marc

[Matthew]

Conversely, Bill Clinton must be a moral guy since the budget was in balance in the late 90's.

Marco

****

More love from Marco for Bill.

Matthew

[Marco Zee]

Here's what Bill's lib friends are saying about the Clinton's........

Here is what the Hollywood mogul Geffen told the New York Times gossip columnist:

I don't think that another incredibly polarizing figure, no matter how smart she is and no matter how ambitious she is--and God knows, is there anybody more ambitious than Hillary Clinton?--can bring the country together. Obama is inspirational, and he's not from the Bush royal family or the Clinton royal family. . . .

I don't think anybody believes that in the last six years, all of a sudden Bill Clinton has become a different person. . . . I think [Republicans] believe she's the easiest to defeat. . . .

It's not a very big thing to say, "I made a mistake" on the war, and typical of Hillary Clinton that she can't. She's so advised by so many smart advisers who are covering every base . . . that machine is going to be very unpleasant and unattractive. . . .

Marc Rich getting pardoned? An oil-profiteer expatriate who left the country rather than pay taxes or face justice? Yet another time when the Clintons were unwilling to stand for the things that they genuinely believe in. Everybody in politics lies, but they do it with such ease, it's troubling.

Matt,
These quotes are from a friend and donor of Bill's....describing Bill's legacy, which is the subject of this thread. How we ended up talking about the morality of budget deficits was Joe's tangential thinking.
Marco