Replies

Thus, the crunchy, confrontational right was in its years in power not so widely popular as the soggy, consensus-minded center-left. Yet surely history will regard Thatcher and Reagan as more consequential leaders than Blair and Clinton. Thatcher and Reagan defined the issues and argued that, as Thatcher once famously said, "There is no alternative."
... [W]e continue to live in the world of Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan, as we once lived in the world of Franklin D. Roosevelt.

Barone: Living in the World of Thatcher & Reagan
Creator's Syndicate ^ | May 15, 2006 | Michael Barone

I disagree with Barone.
"Consequential" and "strong leader" are not the same thing.
While it is, of course, true clinton was a weak leader, a non-leader, a follower even, he was 'consequential,' (albeit in the worst sense of the word).
Today's world of terror

is a direct consequence of clinton's willful utter failure.

ALBRIGHT INDICTS CLINTON FOR TERRORISM FAILURE
(and doesn't even know it)

ALBRIGHT¹: 'Bin Laden and his Network Declared War² on the United States and Struck First and We Have Suffered Deeply'

by Mia T, 4.28.06

I M P E A C H M E N T
h e a r --c l i n t o n --l o s e --i t

by Mia T, 11.11.05

This legacy confab is in and of itself proof certain of clinton's deeply flawed character, and a demonstration in real time of the way in which the clinton years were about a legacy that was incidentally a presidency.
Madeleine Albright captured the essence of this dysfunctional presidency best when she explained why clinton couldn't go after bin Laden.
According to Richard Miniter, the Albright revelation occurred at the cabinet meeting that would decide the disposition of the USS Cole bombing by al Qaeda [that is to say, that would decide to do what it had always done when a "bimbo" was not spilling the beans on the clintons: Nothing]. Only Clarke wanted to retaliate militarily for this unambiguous act of war.
Albright explained that a [sham] Mideast accord would yield [if not peace for the principals, surely] a Nobel Peace Prize for clinton. Kill or capture bin Laden and clinton could kiss the 'accord' and the Peace Prize good-bye.
If clinton liberalism, smallness, cowardice, corruption, perfidy--and, to borrow a phrase from Andrew Cuomo, clinton cluelessness--played a part, it was, in the end, the Nobel Peace Prize that produced the puerile pertinacity that enabled the clintons to shrug off terrorism's global danger.
READ MORE

COPYRIGHT MIA T 2006

.