It's far too soon to give an objective answer on Clinton: in essence, the historians are having to predict into the future in order to assess his actions. My sense is that his ratings will go way down after there's been some time for the hype to shake out, and the true consequences of his presidency to become clear.
I think in terms of 9-11, and foreign matters in general, Clinton's legacy is already becoming clear, and he's headed to the failure column. In terms of domestic policy he was at best "average," and (because he was largely ineffective) probably closer to failure.
It's even somewhat early to judge Bush 41, but he will probably remain basically where he is.
I see real parallels between Buchanan and Clinton. Both were weak men, ill-suited to the Presidency. Buchanan had opportunities to address sectional divisions in the country, but did nothing. Maybe he could not have prevented the coming war, but he did not contribute to a solution in any way. Just so, Clinton had many opportunities to address Terrorism, but he did not. The War started after these Presidents had left office, but each war had become inevitable during their administrations.
Buchanan and Clinton were clear failures. Everyone else needs to be ranked somewhere above them.
As I predicted to a pathetic lib last night:
Fifty years from now, my guy's gonna be remembered for the quote "Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall" (and my great grandchildren will ask "What wall?"). Yours will be remembered for "Ahhhh did not have sex with that woman, Miss Lewinsky". Now, that's a fitting legacy.
Unless some action from the Chinese/Riady connection causes a future threat to the US or is a further embarrassment to Clinton, he will go down as an "Eisenhower.
An 8 year stewardship of a country flush with cash and mostly peaceful through no real action or inaction on their own.
A "Place-keeper", if you please.
"It's far too soon to give an objective answer on Clinton"
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Not for me...I don't need anymore "time" to give an answer. There are enough hard facts out there...to come to a very prudent, accurate, and yes, objective answer.
FWIW-