The push for NMD, the increase in intel funding, and alleviation of the 'post cold war; its ok' thinking is good.
Another difference between Bush and Clinton is that they were seperated by time, and overall security environments. Clinton was in an era where they were not funding intel nearly enough, there was no real push on NMD, and America was in an overall weaker position. In that overall environment making a decision about loosening export controls was definately not good, literally or politically. While Clinton may have won brownie points with the industries involved, he did not make his decisions in an overall environment. He had just one slice of the pie going and that was about it.
Bush on the other hand is retooling the whole focus of the military and pushing NMD. Then Sept 11 pushed everyone into giving more money to the intel community and forced everyone to invest in them. To be honest I feel a whole lot better about this in the new environment than I ever did in the old. Clinton was loosening controls, but at the same time not doing much in way of meeting threats.
While on the surface the decisions look the same, it is other things that make the difference.
Give me your honest opinion.