To: HAL9000
THANK YOU FOR POSTING THIS.....
I just got an email from a 21 year old male friend who said this, "You have to admit, though. Clinton pulled it off. 8 years of peace and prosperity. 8 years of hope for the average American. 8 years of reducing the deficit. The failed impeachment aside, his presidency on paper is the best of modern time. And he left office with a higher approval rating than Reagan. Lucky duck. Don't get me wrong, no one hates Clinton any more than I do, but I can't deny how good things went for him.
It would seem as though it's Bush's bad luck that all this crap came down when he became president. I can guarantee he won't be re-elected (mark my words on that). Not that Gore would have been any better.
Bryan.
I sent him a copy of this article that you posted. THANKS AGAIN!!!!! And I also wrote him a long email explaining why he is WRONG.
4 posted on
10/04/2002 10:15:04 AM PDT by
buffyt
To: buffyt
Your friend may not disagree with Oakley. Bill Clinton was a horrible sleaze and a disgraceful excuse for a human being, but he was far luckier than he had any right to be. The Internet bubble helped him, and he left before it broke. He may have cooked the books on labor statistics. Someone should investigate it. And the prosperity of the very late nineties casts a halo back over the troubled and uncertain early years of his administration. But if what your friend is saying is that Clinton was a very lucky b*st*rd, who can disagree with that?
5 posted on
10/04/2002 10:29:37 AM PDT by
x
To: buffyt
It's not that times were so good, it is that the American people were told that times were so good by the media and the administration. Anytime I talk to people and hear about the foreign policy success of the Clinton administration, I lose my top. The intense pressure the media has given to questioning on Bush and Iraq was strangely absent during Clinton's follies in E. Europe, Iraq and elsewhere.
7 posted on
10/04/2002 10:35:54 AM PDT by
ilgipper
To: buffyt
And he left office with a higher approval rating than Reagan. Only because Clinton's approval ratings were so bad, that they divided personal approval from job approval - just for him. He lost more than 20 points if polls were conducted where one wasn't allowed to condemn his personal behaviour before commenting on his job behaviour.
9 posted on
10/04/2002 10:41:04 AM PDT by
lepton
To: buffyt
"The failed impeachment aside,..."Actually, it was a successful impeachment. Clinton was impeached. Trent Lott and the Senate failed to hold a real trial and failed to convict, but the impeachment stands.
To: buffyt
Oh, dear. Did he get THOSE talking points in a blast fax from the DNC?
23 posted on
10/05/2002 9:50:54 AM PDT by
Howlin
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson