to the top
Posted on 03/28/2002 9:35:18 AM PST by libber-tarian
I recently wrote an article in which I referred to Bill Clinton as a shallow man, and was asked to explain myself by a reader who went on to claim that Bill Clinton "righted the wrongs of active exclusion, willful ignorance, and offensive pity" and "[led] the nation through its longest period of peacetime expansion of economic, social, and individual opportunity."
What I've never understood about the Clinton apologists is that they apparently value talk over action. Other than make speeches filled with feel-good rhetoric, what did Bill Clinton actually do? People may have felt comforted by his words, believed that he cared about them and felt their pain, but in the end, all of Clinton's talk amounted to nothing.
Whenever I talk to supporters of Bill Clinton, I ask them to list the things he did. Most people can't name a single thing, and instead credit him with presiding over an expanding economy, as though coincidence--the dumb luck of having his presidency aligned with the business cycle--somehow proves that he caused it to happen. But what did he do that was so beneficial to the economy? For that matter, what actions did he take to "right the wrongs of active exclusion"? Don't ask, don't tell? Hardly the epitome of inclusiveness.
My memory may be failing me, but when I try to recall the achievements of the Clinton presidency, I can name only two of any significance: Welfare Reform and NAFTA. Despite the fact that neither of these bills originated from the Clinton Administration, I do give him credit for signing them; most Democrats would not have signed either bill. On the other hand, neither of these bills could pass Congress until the Republicans took over in 1994. So I guess the real achievement of the Clinton presidency was scaring enough people during his first two years in office that he put the Senate and the House of Representatives in the hands of the Republicans for the first time since 1954. But I doubt the fans of Clinton would celebrate that monumental achievement.
As far as the economy goes, there is no doubt that Bill Clinton presided over a favorable economy and a remarkable expansion in the stock market. But remember that most of this expansion was due to the rise of the Internet and the resulting speculation on Internet stocks. Remember when the economy started to go south? That's right, just when the Internet bubble burst. Al Gore's attempt to take credit for inventing the Internet notwithstanding, nobody in their right mind would claim that the Clinton Administration was somehow responsible for the Internet boom.
But if you insist on crediting Bill Clinton with the rise of the stock market, then you must also blame him for the "irrational exuberance" that led to its collapse. You must therefore also blame him for the recession. Otherwise, you're crediting him for handing out the drinks at the party and blaming his successor--the guy who has to clean up the mess--for everyone's hangover the next day.
Getting back to my claim that Bill Clinton is a shallow man, it seems to me that someone who squanders an opportunity to achieve greatness and instead uses his power for nothing more than the satisfaction of his own wants and needs is shallow. Bill Clinton is pathologically self-absorbed, which is why he constantly found himself bungling into scandal after scandal.
Now, one may scream that there was a vast right-wing conspiracy to bring down Bill Clinton; even if you believe that nonsense, you have to wonder why Bill Clinton went out of his way to hand his enemies so much ammunition on such a regular basis. And when I say scandal, I'm not even thinking about the "lying under oath" thing, which Clinton supporters dismiss as inconsequential. I'm talking about other serious stuff, all of which is well-known to people who were paying attention, but most of which was underreported due to the media's focus on the more salacious--and therefore media-friendly--Clinton scandals.
If you'll recall: Under Bill Clinton, the White House became a glorified motel, where the Lincoln Bedroom was rented out to contributors who coughed up enough dough. Military secrets ended up in the hands of the Chinese, who laundered money that ended up in the hands of the Democratic National Committee just in time for Clinton's re-election campaign. Al Gore was dispatched to hold illegal fundraisers at Buddhist temples, where he collected money from dozens of nuns who--despite having taken vows of poverty--each managed to produce a $5,000 check for Clinton's re-election. His top fundraiser, Terry McAuliffe, the current head of the aforementioned DNC, made $18,000,000 from a $100,000 investment in Global Crossing, now bankrupt and under investigation for shady government contracts during the Clinton Administration. When Enron's Ken Lay was staying in the Lincoln Bedroom during the Clinton Administration, Enron came to ask the federal government to underwrite foreign loans on 20 different occasions; on 19 of those 20 occasions, the Clinton Administration said yes, to the tune of $2 billion dollars. And let us not forget about selling presidential pardons to drug-runners and fat-cat tax-cheat felons on the lam in Europe. Or the looting of White House furniture for their new home, which is unfortunately located in my home state. And all that's without even getting into Whitewater, the Travel Office firings, or the perjury scandal.
Bill Clinton is a low-life thief, a petty swindler, and a smooth-talking scam artist more suited for Tammany Hall than the White House. But I will admit that Bill Clinton was a man of action, as long as that action involved greasing his palms (or anything other body part for that matter) or furnishing his house. Somehow, Bill Clinton found the time to conduct all of that "business", but he was too busy to take Osama bin Laden when the Sudanese government offered to hand him over to us in 1996. Think about it: we wouldn't be chasing bin Laden around the globe right now if Clinton had focused a little more on taking care of the threats against us and a little less on figuring out every conceivable way that he could cash in on his power or use it to get women.
Which reminds me...as far as giving Clinton credit for presiding over a time of peace, what kind of peace was it? During the Clinton Administration, there were 6 major terrorist attacks against the U.S. which left over 415 dead and 6,500 injured. It seems to me that it's very easy to maintain the illusion of peace by ignoring the dangers that surround us. You may look back fondly at the 1990s as a time of peace, but it was a peace during which we relaxed while our enemies were getting stronger and preparing to annihilate us. That's a pretty shallow peace if you ask me.
Bill Clinton is shallow because he spoke often of his convictions but did nothing to realize them. He's shallow because he was given remarkable gifts and the opportunity to do great things with them, yet he achieved nothing substantial. In the end, his presidency amounted to little more than talk and corruption. He rarely took any action unless it somehow benefitted him. But whenever action mattered for the good of the nation, Bill Clinton was nowhere to be found. And that is why the man who spent the final days of his presidency fretting about his legacy will find it to be recorded quite accurately by history: Bill Clinton is a shallow, failed man.
Such as providing American parents with the opportunity to explain to their pre-teen children what oral sex is.
Carter - giving away the Panama Canal
When Murrymom points out these things she is obviously oblivious to the fact that surpluses mean we've been overcharged for government and that rebates and tax cuts give the money back to the people who have overpaid. Therefore, the excess hoarding of funds - which she thinks is a good thing - ends.
Families and private entities should have surpluses. Governments should not.
Clinton was for sale and from what I see of Bush, he is not. He's not as principled or conservative as I'd like, but there is no evidence of corruption on his part.
When Senator Hollings was ranting that he was insulted by getting smaller donations than some members of his committee, what he was really crying about (in all likelihood) was that he sold himself too cheaply.
I have challenged you on countless opportunities to have a head-to-head debate about who was the author of this recession.
It was Bill Clinton. I was in Brazil during the '00 election period and I clearly remember Lou Dobbs saying on CNN that there was a recession on the horizon and that it will be tagged on Bill.
You've never ever challenged me on that. I think it is time you did.
That's something that ALL Clintonites are proud of.
Let's talk about that, too.
to the top
You may be partly right. I must be too engrossed in the NCAA tourney to have heard about any of these accomplishments by the Gin Twins' father.
It was Bill Clinton.
When inflation adjusted GNP growth goes down to less than 1% next year, you Clintonhaters will still blame Clinton, just like you are trying to do with Enron.
Bush Repukes ain't got no sense of responsibility for any of the disastrous economic news occurring on their watch. That's why their days in power are numbered.
I vote for the latter..
Among his accomplishments, Bush is fighting the war that was forced upon him by the inaction(s) and weakness of resolve of the US under the Clinton acministration. Kobar Towers, African Embassies, 1993 WTC, the USS Cole and Clintons lack of decisive leathal response to these events all gave the signal to bin Laden and Co. - "these guys can be had"!
And I use the term "Clinton administration" loosely. Clinton's cabinet and staff were rank amatuers - college kids playing at running the most powerful country in the world.
Bush has surrounded himself with some of the best and most experienced domestic and foreign policy people in the nation. These folks aren't "wonks", they have actually accomplished difficult tasks in the field as opposed to the Clinton bunch that learned "policy" in the liberal classrooms of the ivy league schools. They had no apprenticeship - they were thrown into running the USofA without an ounce of real-world experience. That as much as anything else that Clinton did was the reason for his disasterous 8 years.
Comprende.....I doubt it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.