I've heard a lot of garbage about "the Clinton-Bush years" as if we are talking about the Bush-CHENEY years.
We should at the very least stick to the facts, and the facts are that Bush did everything the opposite of what President Clinton did. After Clinton protected our national forests, Bush let the loggers, drillers and miners ravage our national forests. While Clinton protected our rights, Bush took them away. Whereas Clinton sought peace through diplomacy, Bush sought power through war-making ... etc. ... etc. ... etc.
Secondly, during the Clinton years, we had UNPRECEDENTED prosperity.
With Bush as president, all but the rich have seen that prosperity disappear. Local property taxes have soared during the Bush years as a direct result of his tax-cuts-for-the-rich and cuts in federal aid to the states -- forcing state, county and local governments to have to make up the difference by raising their taxes or cutting vital services.
If you don't believe me, or if you do but want proof of what I say, go to this link:
http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/and you will see in chart form how employment went steadily UP during the Clinton years and down during the Bush years (with one minor bump up).
You will also see how UN-employment went steadily DOWN during the Clinton years, and went up again during the Bush years.
And there is more to consider:
When Bill Clinton was president, street crime was reduced, the numbers of Americans living in poverty fell, the numbers of new jobs rose dramatically, we had a balanced budget and even a surplus, diplomacy was favored over unilateral aggression, we enjoyed peace and prosperity and were respected around the world.
During the Bush years, street crime went up again.
Poverty is up again.
The federal budget is NOT balanced, and has not been balanced all through the Bush years.
Every year, Bush's policies create a budget deficit and add to our federal debt woes.
Bush favors aggression over diplomacy.
And we do NOT have peace and prosperity.
Yes, I will take the Clinton years every time -- and those years would be even better if we could do away with the media whores who told us how charming Bush was/is, and believed Bush when he said he "would change the tone in Washington."
If we had had REAL reporters and journalists during the Clinton years -- instead of the howling pack of nincompoops we had (and still have) -- Clinton would have been their hero instead of their punching bag.
I think it is about time for us all to do our own research and our own thinking and stop letting the media maggots tell us who is winning, who is losing, who is good and who is bad.
It is beyond me why smart people in New Hampshire have their minds changed by some voters (excuse me, caucus-goers who don't always get to vote FOR their FIRST choice) in Iowa.
I think for myself and everyone else should too.
There is NO such category as the Clinton-Bush years -- those were two OPPOSITE administrations in EVERY way.
If President Clinton could run again, you can bet I would vote for him. Those were good years for the vast majority of Americans, even for the rich who did very well too, even though they paid higher taxes then than they do now.
Every category of Americans prospered during the Clinton years, and Hillary Clinton played an important advisory role in making all of that possible -- she was President Clinton's most valued and trusted adviser and was an integral part of all his presidential decision-making.
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(410 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
