Thursday, March 12, 2009

I miss Bill Clinton


Editor's Note: I take it back. I miss him a lot less than I thought I did.

--------------------

I can't believe I'm writing this, but I miss Bill Clinton.

After eight years of Bush and less than two months of Bush 2.0, I'm so sick of the maddening irresponsibility obscured by partisan bickering. And you know what? Clinton was way better than either Bush or Obama. I recognize that in a lot of ways I miss Clinton because I miss Gingrich, but Clinton should get to share credit with the Republican Congress for the policies he helped craft and which he signed into law. I'm also not saying he was the perfect president or that I agree with all his policies and proposals. I could easily draw up a list of complaints, but on the whole, I'd say Bill Clinton was one of the best presidents we've had in the last century of American history- certainly better than 43 and 44.

Reason contributor Steve Chapman put it best when he wrote last week that:

Clinton, for all his appetites and excesses, was a cautious, centrist sort of Democrat. He had innumerable ideas for things the government could do, but most were small and fairly innocuous. He was willing to go along with Republicans on some of their sound ideas—such as balancing the budget, reforming the welfare system, and expanding foreign trade.

He focused on making government better, not making it bigger. He didn't greatly enlarge Washington's role in our lives. He proclaimed—or conceded—that the "era of big government is over."

Here are 6 reasons to miss Bill Clinton:


1. Balanced Budget

Unlike the last two administrations which seem to have a pathological obsession with running monstrous budget deficits, Bill Clinton made it a priority to balance the US Federal budget and was the first U.S. president to report a surplus since the 1960s. The problem with deficits is that they are financed by issuing debt (which hogs credit markets and pushes up interest rates, hurting economic growth) and printing money (which inflates the value of our currency, eating away at every American's earnings and causing prices to rise). Deficit spending also allows government to grow beyond all sense of reasonable proportion. Take a look at this graphic and tell me which recent president has been the most responsible with the Federal budget:

(Source- PowerlineBlog | Hat Tip: David Boaz, The Cato Institute | Edits mine)


2. Welfare Reform

In contrast to the big entitlement mentality and policies of George W. Bush and Barack Obama, Bill Clinton promised welfare reform to slim down and improve the results of Federal entitlement programs. He differed with Congressional Republicans over how to best reform welfare, and vetoed two of their welfare reform bills, but eventually signed the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act in 1996.


3. Expanded Foreign Trade

Bill Clinton worked to expand international trade and eventually signed and pushed for the ratification of NAFTA. While NAFTA remains controversial, Clinton's effort to create a free trade zone in North America has significantly increased the flow of goods and services across borders, resulting in greater wealth and productivity for the citizens of the three signatories to this agreement. Contrast this with Bush's steel tariff fiasco and Obama's "buy American" provision in the stimulus bill. These protectionist policies hurt international relations, risk setting off a "trade war," and block increased productivity by obstructing the free flow of goods, services, and capital across borders and resulting in their subsequent global misallocation.


4. Bipartisanship

In each of the three examples above, Clinton worked together with Republicans to make it happen. A Republican Congress helped pass those budgets that eventually yielded surpluses, and the Gingrich Congress shared Clinton's goal of balancing the Federal budget. This wasn't a Democrat or Republican issue. It was a "be smart" or "be dumb and irresponsible" issue, and the leaders of both parties chose to be smart. There were hard fights over welfare reform, which is okay, and in fact it's a wonderful part of our democratic, federal system of government. But both sides agreed that welfare needed to be reformed, and they eventually came together and made it happen. As for NAFTA, that was an item on the agenda of Clinton's Republican predecessor, and Clinton took up the torch and carried it through to ratification during his presidency. Clinton was able to govern from the center, to govern cautiously and practically, and to concede to the merit of Republican ideas and policies. This is a sharp contrast to the bitter partisanship of the Obama and Bush administrations.


5. Prudence

A lot of why we should miss Bill Clinton isn't about what he did in office, but what he didn't do. Bill Clinton just didn't do half the crap that we have let the last two administrations get away with. He didn't advocate the breakneck expansion of government into every aspect of our lives like Obama and Bush have. He didn't grab for unchecked executive power. He didn't push the Patriot Act, the Iraq war, No Child Left Behind, the Medicaid drug benefit, the Stimulus bill, the Afghanistan troop surge, or monstrously unbalanced budgets. Back then, we talked about the Federal budget in billions, not trillions like today. Back then, things just seemed more simple, manageable, reasonable, and prudent. Today the government has gotten way out of control, and there is no evidence from Obama that he plans to curb it. I wish Obama would be Clinton 2.0 and not a Bush/Carter hybrid, and I wish Bush had been Reagan 2.0 and not a Nixon/Johnson hybrid.


6. Bill Clinton Had Soul




Spread the Word!


Delicious button

Stumbleupon


12 comments:

Chris F. said...

In a weird way, I am kind of with you on this. I reminisce about the 1990's as the good ole days. Sadly, the immediate future will be much worse than it is now.

TennZen said...

And to add to your list of fond remembrances, Bill Clinton really did seem to have his fingers on the pulse of the common man. Remember "I feel your pain?" When Bill Clinton spoke, it genuinely seemed like he was talking TO us and not AT us.

I have often wondered what the reaction to 9/11 would have been if it had happened under Clinton's watch rather than under George II's watch.

Unlike the "let's win one for the Gipper" Reagan era, and the detached feeling we got from both Bushes, Clinton really seemed to empathize.

And Obama? He's the rockstar... or the Messiah. There's no "he's one of us" vibe from Obama. He says one thing ("no earmarks") and then turns right around and blatantly does another.

All Clinton did was fool around. Gawd, I can't believe I just said that!

W. E. Messamore said...

Ha ha ha ha... it's so funny to me that you guys know exactly what I mean. You feel kind of strange about it, but you realize that yeah, Clinton really wasn't so bad, and in many ways was actually pretty good for our country.

Then when we realize how small and petty our differences with Clinton seem by comparison to our differences with Obama and Bush, we get snapped back to 2009 and just end up feeling bad. Thanks for letting me know that I'm not the only one.

Elijah said...

I'm sorry but he failed in the most critical aspect of his role as president. He was a piss poor CINC.

W. E. Messamore said...

I wish I could have mentioned military policy in this list, but it is notably absent. Like the two presidents to follow him, Clinton was too hawkish, with the most major troop deployments of any president in history.

And like 43 and 44, when he did deploy troops, he didn't use overwhelming force and give them reasonable rules of engagement so they could be safe and do their job.

He could see that the Cold War was ending, and was smart enough to cut down the size of the DOD, but then stretched it thin and wasn't smart enough to prepare for the unconventional methods of international terrorism.

But still... I think he was a better Commander in Chief than Bush and probably Obama- we'll see.

Anonymous said...

Clinton didn't balance the budget and there was no "surplus".

http://mises.org/story/542

W. E. Messamore said...

Wow. That's really eye-opening. Seriously- thanks very much for sharing that. I will be sure to publish a retraction soon when I get a chance.

ffbull said...

I only have to think about black hawk down and changing the responsibility for rocket research funnelled to China from the Defense Dept. to the Commerce Dept. Although the later was not changed by the Neo-con Bush.

W. E. Messamore said...

Didn't hear about that last one. Though yes, Clinton's many, many major troop deployments (more than any other president in history) will definitely count against him in the history books.

Rob H said...

On top of being a War criminal, He's also a Bilderberg member, trilateral commission members, CFR member and on the roster as a Bohemian Grove attendee (If these groups mean nothing to you, just know they are BAD. Or if you have some time do some research on these groups) Clinton *and many other presidents past and present*
Has the agenda of THOSE groups in mind, not the will of the people.

Also he never "balanced the budget" like he's been praised for ever since he left office.
They claimed this over and over in the media to the point where it's believed to be fact....They claimed that there was a budget surplus under Clinton's presidency, but the fact is the national debt rose year after year... so how could there be a surplus if we are still borrowing money and adding to the national debt????
Case closed... but lying about (and taking credit for) an imaginary surplus is one thing... the truly bad part is the end result:

During Bill Clinton’s presidency, from 1992 to 2000:
- Spending increased by 29.49%.
- Tax revenues increased by 85.58%.<----!!!!

Unfortunately I guess my point is: He's just as bad as the rest of em'....

W. E. Messamore said...

Good points! did you see my editor's note at the top?

Anonymous said...

Mikhail Kryzhanovsky, KGB. "CIA Millenium Hilton conspiracy".

VIDEO http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uvG4nLRn4PI
-------------------------------------

Patrick Fitzerald, member
Department of Justice Office of Special Counsel
Bond Federal Building
1400 New York Avenue, NW, Ninth Floor
Washington D.C. 20530

--------------------------------------

October 28, 2010

Dear Mr. Fitzerald:

I have nothing to lose after I've refused to participate in CIA-FBI conspiracy which I call "Millenium Hilton" operation - I have no money, no job, no permanent place to stay. I'm telling the truth and I'm sending you a set of special questions related to the U.S. national security, or rather its absence. I want to make it clear - America is deaf and blind because CIA actually does not exist.
I name people who have to lose a lot - millions of dollars, power, influence, popularity. They will lie to you once you start investigation into their anti-American activity, except Bill Clinton, the weakest link, who knows what lying under oath means and how impeachment looks like. A good thing is - America is no more on their side.I understand that I violated Intelligence Identities Protection Act of 1982. There's no other way to bring to justice Bill Clinton who initiated the left-wing conspiracy and Barack Obama who's covering it up.
-------------------------------------
-------------------------
I, a former KGB officer, was recruited by CIA in 1995 as "Filament". I had to spy on the US Congress and prepare special instructions for American president on successful election and re-election campaigns, strategic planning and top decisions making, national security, foreign policy and diplomacy, propaganda, economy, war and special operations.
They guaranteed me "anything I wanted", including special CIA status ("stay in USA as long as you want and do whatever you think is necessary") and "best medical service in the world" . It was absolutely clear that political surveillance and control over the White House and the U.S. Congress, not national security, was and is the CIA top priority. They were interested in effective interrogation,tortures and murders methods -I gave them detailed instructions on that. They asked me if I was a sniper, because they had "a job up to my high professional skills" in America .
I've stopped cooperation in 2000 but they press me hard and they want me back no matter what.

I understand that I risk my life and the last thing I want is a staged suicide with a forged letter my pocket: "I did it myself, life has no sense".
Life has sense. And liberty - too.

I hope you'll inform people about your investigation and I do hope that you are as honest and persistent as your predecessor, Independent Councel Ken Starr. I hope you will bring Bill Clinton, Leon Panetta, Rahm Emanuel, Robert Mueller, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama to justice. The most dangerous crime family in American history belongs to federal jail.
You can reach me via my e-mail address (prof7prof@yahoo.com) and I'm ready to answer all your questions and go to Congress hearing if needed.

Sincerely,
Mikhail Kryzhanovsky
a former KGB USSR intelligence officer and the "Nabat" KGB anti-terror group member (sniper)
a former Ukrainian National Security Service intelligence officer
a former CIA/FBI agent, code name "Filament"

---------------------------------

Questions for Bill Clinton, the U.S. President in 1993-2001.
1. Have you ever been recruited by CIA ? If yes, what for ?
2. As an Oxford second-

Post a Comment