Clinton legacy

Recently, there we had a discussion concerning the relevancy of Carter. Well, from this article there should be no question of the relevancy of Clinton.



  • 13 Comments sorted by Votes Date Added
  • I don't know ray. Those 8 years are starting to look like a golden age, sex scandal or no sex scandal. The economy was booming, jobs were being created, the government had cash, gas was cheap, even the airlines were making money, and we didn't have our Army tied up in a quagmire overseas with no end in sight. I didn't like Clinton's FMLA, but I did like Clinton's welfare reform. Gentlemen, start your tirades.
  • I wonder if anyone every thinks of all the major companies that had crooked CEOs such as ENRON who proliferated under Clinton's outstanding morals and honesty?

    Seems to this poor little country person that 9/11 had as much to do with all the gas prices, airlines, etc., having problems as did anything else.

  • I disagree. I don't think Clinton's morals or honesty were outstanding at all.
  • "Those 8 years are starting to look like a golden age, sex scandal or no sex scandal. The economy was booming, jobs were being created, the government had cash, gas was cheap, even the airlines were making money, and we didn't have our Army tied up in a quagmire overseas with no end in sight."

    Ah, Crout. Hindsight is generally best viewed through rose-colored glasses, isn't it? x;-)

    I fondly remember the Clinton years as well. In retrospect, however, so much of the great strides we made during his tenure were pretty much illusory and temporary.

    The economy was booming, but it turned out to be fueled by the magic, smoke and mirrors of the dot-coms (and we all know what happened there, don't we?)

    I also remember complaining about the high cost of gas during the Clinton years. The more things change, the more they stay the same.

    We didn't have our Army tied up in a quagmire. You're right. We didn't. We had several to get tied up in. Bosnia, Somalia, Iraq (i.e., Operations Northern and Southern Watch), etc. Before I retired from the military reserves in 1999, I can honestly say I was never busier or deployed more than I was during the Clinton years.

    The one thing I do agree with you on is that at least the government had cash!
  • Beagle, is that really you? YOu sound so much like a conservative.
  • I always knew that you were a conservative beagle in a liberal sheeps clothing! Welcome prodigal son!
  • Welcome to the dark side Beagle. See, coming out of the closet isn't so bad, now is it?
  • I guess my real point was that you can take any administration - Democrat or Republican - and spin its accomplishments in your memory to reflect the best and conveniently forget the worst. For example, I think that Richard Nixon was the greatest foreign policy president we ever had - detente with the Russians, opening up Mainland China, getting out of Vietnam, etc. That little Watergate thing? Fuggedabouddit!

    My biggest gripe with Clinton was his hypocrisy. While he was dallying with Ms. Lewinski under his desk, we in the military were rolling out the Dept. of Defense Joint Ethics Regulation (a Clinton administration product) and training all of our NCOs and officers in ethical conduct; introducing a new punitive article to the Uniform Code of Military Justice - Fraternization. Many officers lost their careers for having dalliances with subordinates. Again, this occurred on Clinton's watch and his behavior, had he been held accountable as we were, probably would have gotten him a life sentence in front of a firing squad.

    So, although I am a Democrat, I'm not necessarily a liberal in all things.
  • I agree, Beag. My problem with Clinton is that when he disgraced himself, his office and his family he should have done the honorable thing and resigned. That act might...might...have saved us from 8 years of Bush....and Gore wouldn't have even had to do a Jerry Ford and issue a pardon because there was nothing to pardon. You mention Bosnia and Somalia, so my question to you is: did the US military accomplish their missions over there and did they get out in good order? Or were we bogged down year after year with no end in sight? (Actually there will be an end....despite all the rhetoric about "staying the course" and despite the reality, we'll declare "mission accomplished" and start pulling out troops right before the 2006 Congressional elections....just my prediction....and leave the Iraquis to the brutal business of civil war before they end up with theocracy, much like Iran...again just a prediction.)
  • I'm not going into the Left/Right Wing diatribes that have become so much a part of the Forum and trust me I'm no Bush fan!

    I am surprised, however, that for all the pro/con-comments (Democrat/Republican comments)about Clinton's eight years no one has mentioned the Clinton administration's most glaring failure; that being his "Do-nothing" approach to terrorism. His eight years were marked by more terrorist activity than during any other President's administration. If in doubt, do your own search. Hundreds of Americans were killed during his eight years and thousands were injured: WTC(1993), Khobi military barracks (1996), US Embassy in Kenya (1998), US Cole (2000), etc. In my opinion his administration's lack of action directly contributed to the WTC(2001) bombing, that occured shortly after Clinton left office. These are just some of the attacks on the US by foreign terrorist and doesn't even include American terrorist, i.e., OK City.

    In addition to his lack of action in regards to terrorism, let's not forget that Clinton changed Bush One's highly successful effort to provide food for Somalian refugees into an ill-conceived search for Somailian war leaders that turned into one of America's most tragic military episodes.

    One last thought. Clinton took us into Bosnia. In order not to suffer the political damage of having body counts of US soldiers on nightly TV, he indiscriminately bombed civilians from the air. Even the military was upset with these tactics (search Gen Wesley Clark's comments). After the bombings, Clinton put our troops into Bosnia for a "...short time..."; just until a new Bosnian government could be stabilized and take control. That was 1995. Ten years later, our troops are still there. The same individuals that critisize Bush for having troops in Irag for two years, while trying to stabilize a new government, don't seem to notice that it's taken us over ten years to attempt to do the same thing in Bosnia, where it should have been a much easier tasks than what we face in Irag.

    Just to set the record straight and to make sure I've upset everyone, I think Bush's first four years in office have been truly less than remarkable; but at least he tried to do something about the threat of terrorism against our country. Would he have done any more than Clinton were it nor for 9/11; I don't know?
  • I'm going for all out support of Crout (in his posts south of the original) on this one, with an additional pitch for Parabeagle. I think Clinton did well, though he had problems with morals and ethics that were disappointing including Lewinsky, military fraternization policies (in addition to Beagle's I'll add "don't ask, don't tell"), and allowing the big business financial shenagians. He was good with a blind eye to ethics and morals, but he did his homework politically and in the international arena. On response to terror I'm divided. He responded when hit but did not appear to be proactive.

    Re Baby Bush I am aware my colors show. I could live with the father (still haven't swallowed Iran-Contra); can't stand the son. Even Barbara's been shown frowning and it looks like Laura's growing a spine. (Interesting that Father Bush and Clinton seem to doing multi goodwill tours together now....) I don't think "W" has done much for terror - he was quite prepared to sit on advice from the Clinton administration until it literally blew up under his butt and ever since he's been trying to run the world American style. If he really wanted to protect the country at home and abroad he'd clean up Homeland Security and FEMA and take the advice of the 9/11 Commission Report on cleaning up and reorganizing the FBI and CIA.

    He is now becoming the photo op king. From the WTC in NYC (higher profile than the Pentagon or the burned field in PA); he was drawn unwillingly two days before the end of ANOTHER Crawford vacation to see what was going on after Katrina. Now he has made 7 or 8 trips to the Rita area, but last I heard hasn't yet declared disaster areas in all Rita-affected areas to release emergency funds. Can you say smile vs. act that I care?
  • Supplement

    Which would you rather do?
    1) Talk to (and have your picture taken with) the mother of soldier who died in your war, put the military and government agencies on alert to respond to an oncoming hurricane, or have your picture taken riding bikes with seven time Tour de France winner Lance Armstrong on your ranch?

    2) Keep gays out of the military, or relieve some tired troops who have already overstayed their time with some already excellently trained military personnel?

    (I'm on a roll, but I'll stop now.)

Sign In or Register to comment.