Clinton's Accomplishments???

[9sublime]

The problem I have with all of these graphs and charts is that it assumes the President handled the economy in order to produce these results.

The fact of the matter is that the President does not influence the economy as much people would like to believe.

So now it was all an accident? Come on, just give him a little bit of credit...

 

[palerider]

So now it was all an accident? Come on, just give him a little bit of credit...

Name what he did and I will certainly give him credit. The budget deal of 93, however, failed at its stated objectives so giving clinton credit as a result of that initiative is to give him credit when the policy he initiated failed. Was the economy good because clinton failed to achieve his stated goals?

 

[Popeye]

Name what he did and I will certainly give him credit. The budget deal of 93, however, failed at its stated objectives so giving clinton credit as a result of that initiative is to give him credit when the policy he initiated failed. Was the economy good because clinton failed to achieve his stated goals?

Nobody but you, and a few disgruntled Republicans, feel that Clinton's budget reduction efforts of 1993 were a failure. Alan Greenspan, Paul Volcker, Business Week, among others all give him credit for the booming economy of the '90's. I think their experience carries the day. You've had nothing to say but, prove it, prove it. That method of defense is usually reserved for elementary school.

 

[palerider]

Nobody but you, and a few disgruntled Republicans, feel that Clinton's budget reduction efforts of 1993 were a failure. Alan Greenspan, Paul Volcker, Business Week, among others all give him credit for the booming economy of the '90's. I think their experience carries the day. You've had nothing to say but, prove it, prove it. That method of defense is usually reserved for elementary school.

This has nothing to do with being disgruntled. The primary goal stated for the 93 budget was to effectively lower interest rates. Interest rates did not go down so it failed whether you like the man or not. The goal was not achieved. He stated that as a result of lowering interest rates, the deficit would go down. That did not happen so again, failure. It doesn't matter whether you like him or not, the stated goal didn't happen so it failed. Good intentions do not constitute success.

Then he justified raising taxes with the argument that by raising taxes, the interest rate would fall. Again. Failure.

If you are giving clinton credit for the economy based on the 93 budget deal, you are stating that the economy was good as a result of clinton failing to achieve what he set out to do with the budget.

Actually, what I have had to say is "what did he do" and your complete inability to give an answer says all that need be said.

 

[Popeye]

This has nothing to do with being disgruntled. The primary goal stated for the 93 budget was to effectively lower interest rates. Interest rates did not go down so it failed whether you like the man or not. The goal was not achieved. He stated that as a result of lowering interest rates, the deficit would go down. That did not happen so again, failure. It doesn't matter whether you like him or not, the stated goal didn't happen so it failed. Good intentions do not constitute success.

Then he justified raising taxes with the argument that by raising taxes, the interest rate would fall. Again. Failure.

If you are giving clinton credit for the economy based on the 93 budget deal, you are stating that the economy was good as a result of clinton failing to achieve what he set out to do with the budget.

By my count, you've used the word failure twice, plus failed and failing once each to describe Clinton's economic efforts. So, by your measure, Clinton '93 efforts were all failures, you give him no credit at all for the strong economy of the 1990's Why then don't the experts agree with you? Why then, don't the American people agree with you? He left office with the highest approval rating of any 2 term president. Was the booming economy during his presidency just a coincidence? You know what, I've come to the conclusion that, inside, you know Clinton was a successful president. Publicly however, you're just too proud to admit it.

 

[palerider]

By my count, you've used the word failure twice, plus failed and failing once each to describe Clinton's economic efforts. So, by your measure, Clinton '93 efforts were all failures, you give him no credit at all for the strong economy of the 1990's Why then don't the experts agree with you? Why then, don't the American people agree with you? He left office with the highest approval rating of any 2 term president. Was the booming economy during his presidency just a coincidence? You know what, I've come to the conclusion that, inside, you know Clinton was a successful president. Publicly however, you're just too proud to admit it.

If you state a goal, or goals, institute a plan to achieve them and the plan does not achieve them, then, by definition, you have failed. If good happens anyway, then the good has happened in spite of you, not because of you.

And it isn't that I simply won't give clinton credit for the economy. If I knew what he did, then I would have a basis upon which to give him credit. I do give him credit for more or less staying out of the way of the economy and letting it run, but that is hardly "handling" the economy.

As to why experts give him credit. I have already listed greenspan's historical revisions which require him to credit clinton without actually being able to list what clinton did. Greenspan was heavily involved in the 93 budget deal with clinton and actions taken on his advice failed and rather than simply admit the facts, he, like clinton, wants to be remembered in a positive light.

As to clinton's numbers. It is clear that he remained popular because of the economy and as you clearly demonstrate, most americans don't have much of a grasp of the economy. If it is good, they give the guy in the whitehouse credit and if it is bad, they blame him. You, like a very large number of americans give him credit because it was good but just like every american who gives him credit, you are quite unable to say what exactly it was that he did to make it good. You give him credit for creating vast numbers of jobs but can't say how he did it. You give him credit for low numbers of teen pregnancies but can't say what he did to achieve that. You give him credit for keeping the skies blue and the ocean salty but can't say how he did that either.

If you can say what he did to achieve all that you give him credit for and can defend the actions and demonstrate how they had a positiive impact on the economy and created the conditions that existed, then you have an argument that I, in all likelyhood, won't be able to defeat. You don't have any such argument, however. You are agreeing with a man who has his own motives for rewriting history for his own benefit. He states that the 93 budget deal was courageous, but doesn't mention that it failed to achieve its stated goals and he doesn't say at all, exactly what else it was that clinton did to create, or maintain the economy as it existed.

Now maybe you are willing to give credit where it really isn't due because you like the guy or maybe you are disposed to believe a man now who most democrats called the devil before his book came out praising clinton, or maybe you just didn't realise that the 93 budget failed to achieve its stated goals and were unaware that clinton didn't, in fact, handle the economy at all but are too invested in the myth that he did to admit that you simply can't say what he did but won't admit that you are wrong either. In either case, or in any case that I might have overlooked, unless you can state what he did and what that action's effect was on the economy, you don't have an argument and deriding me, simply isn't a substitute for being able to state clearly what he did to create the economy. You were very eager to step up and give him credit which suggested that you could say what he did. Clearly you can't and have exposed yourself as no more than a cheer leader on the sidelines saying hooray for our side with no inkling of how the game on the field is being played.

 

[top gun]

Nobody but you, and a few disgruntled Republicans, feel that Clinton's budget reduction efforts of 1993 were a failure. Alan Greenspan, Paul Volcker, Business Week, among others all give him credit for the booming economy of the '90's. I think their experience carries the day. You've had nothing to say but, prove it, prove it. That method of defense is usually reserved for elementary school.

And of course it's sooo obvious that you're right it really discredits many things that has been said on the other side on most other issues. It's just a failure to admit that the progressives have achieved success while the neo-cons bash and fail.

Everyone... well OK there is obviously crazy neo-con exceptions... most rational people remember how well President Clinton's budgets and deficit reduction plans worked. Heck I think there's now been about 40 pages citing all kinds of experts, highly regarded financial publications, multiple leaders of the Fed etc., plus all the many, many posted documents.

The neo-cons can't fool anybody any longer. When watch them on TV you can tell they don't even believe their own Party line BS anymore. They are busted out as huge liars on so many issues both public & private their credibility is zilch. There silly games of twisting & contorting to desperately try and somehow discredit a wonderful President Clinton economy are similar to saying...

You said you'd stop violent crime. You only reduced violent crime by 95%. You did not stop all violent crime. Your policy failed! Do you expect credit for failing!

Silly... ridiculous... that dog won't hunt... partisan neo-con attacks

The American people are smarter than that now. They've already started taking back their country and I myself am more than happy to watch the outcome of this upcoming election and the big one in 08.

The Far Right put lipstick on a pig and called him the prom queen. That makeup has long since washed off and everyone sees what their policies bring.

Another President Clinton would be a big first step in helping us dig out of yet another Republican catastrophe!!!

 

[palerider]

And of course it's sooo obvious that you're right it really discredits many things that has been said on the other side on most other issues. It's just a failure to admit that the progressives have achieved success while the neo-cons bash and fail.

What is most obvious is that you seem to be quite unable to say exactly what it was that clinton did to "handle" the economy.

Everyone... well OK there is obviously crazy neo-con exceptions... most rational people remember how well President Clinton's budgets and deficit reduction plans worked. Heck I think there's now been about 40 pages citing all kinds of experts, highly regarded financial publications, multiple leaders of the Fed etc., plus all the many, many posted documents.

First, I am not a neo con. Calling me such only demonstrates how little you know about conservativism. Secondly, in your "40 pages" don't you find it strange that none of those "experts" could say exactly what clinton did either? I saw the 93 budget mentioned, but then that was a failure. So what did he do?

The neo-cons can't fool anybody any longer. When watch them on TV you can tell they don't even believe their own Party line BS anymore. They are busted out as huge liars on so many issues both public & private their credibility is zilch. There silly games of twisting & contorting to desperately try and somehow discredit a wonderful President Clinton economy are similar to saying...

What isn't fooling anyone is your inability to simply say what clinton did. You are gibbering back and forth congratulating each other on your victory when you have yet to answer the most basic question. WHAT DID HE DO?

You said you'd stop violent crime. You only reduced violent crime by 95%. You did not stop all violent crime. Your policy failed! Do you expect credit for failing!

The budget failed to achieve its stated goals. Any good that resulted was in spite of clinton and not because of him if the 93 budget is the basis of your position.

The American people are smarter than that now. They've already started taking back their country and I myself am more than happy to watch the outcome of this upcoming election and the big one in 08.

So at least one of you "smart" guys should be able to list what clinton did and how it effected the economy.

 

[top gun]

Well my friends I'm glad that we were able to post many... not all of course only so much time to post... but many of President Clinton's accomplishments... much of which are well know economic accomplishments noted by the experts in that field.

As we all know the Republicans have been the massive government growers & spenders of late... both before and after President Clinton.

Neo-cons see the writing on the wall. Many, many Republicans are jumping ship and have announced they are not even going to try to get re-elect... because they sincerely know that they no longer can.

Whether it be decorum in a public restroom scandal or the best long term interest of our economy many have shown their true colors as being facetious, mean spirited and unreliable.

I think as the 08 election nears even vicious neo-cons will finally start to realize that it is inevitable that there will be a Democratic President and most likely that will be President Hillary Clinton. They will see themselves become more and more impotent because of all the harm they have done. The grief this causes the fear mongers is a very good thing for The United States of America!

We still have to get through one more year of this stranglehold but it is ending... because the people of The United States of America wants it to end.

I encourage everyone to continue to highlight the damage and let people know that there's another Clinton that cares about them and is on the way!

 

[palerider]

Well my friends I'm glad that we were able to post many... not all of course only so much time to post... but many of President Clinton's accomplishments... much of which are well know economic accomplishments noted by the experts in that field.

You keep claiming "accomplishments" and you have posted a hell of a list but to date, you haven't said HOW he accomplished any of them. Don't you find that embarrasing? I know I certainly wouldn't claim that someone had accomplished a thing unless I was quite sure that I could describe what he or she did and how those actions brought about the claimed accomplishment.

And your list of strawmen is no substitute for being able to say what clinton did to "accomplish" the things you give him credit for.

 

[PoliticalGrrrl]

Bah. I don't really get the big deal about Bill Clinton. He was a fair president and while I don't think he was the best, he certainly wasn't the worst.

To me, always looking back on what he did or did not do, seems counter-productive. Sort of a should-have, could-have, would-have scenario. I would much rather look forward and try and figure what the hell we as a nation are going to do in order to get our country back on track... but that's me.

I mean, if we want to talk about really bad presidents of the past, why doesn't Jimmy Carter's name pop up? I mean honestly. The guy is one hell of a good Samaritan, but he sucked royally at position of POTUS.

Regardless, I don't understand why Bill Clinton's time in the White House is brought up time and time again? I understand the entire learning from the past mistakes, etc... but let's face it. What president has the U.S. had that hasn't stepped in it or fubar'd something up for future generations to fix?

Perhaps we should do away with career politians? *cough*Ted Kennedy for example*cough*

 

[USMC the Almighty]

Perhaps we should do away with career politians? *cough*Ted Kennedy for example*cough*

I agree entirely. The Founders would be outraged that the being a politician was a lifelong career. They wanted politicians to serve their term or two and then go back to their free life on the farm.

 

[Popeye]

Bah. I don't really get the big deal about Bill Clinton. He was a fair president and while I don't think he was the best, he certainly wasn't the worst.

Bill Clinton was much more than "fair", he was our finest modern day president, statistics bear that out, despite what you may hear from certain envious, disgruntled members of this board.

http://www.perkel.com/politics/clinton/accomp.htm​

http://clinton5.nara.gov/WH/Accomplishments/additional.html

 

[palerider]

Bill Clinton was much more than "fair", he was our finest modern day president, statistics bear that out, despite what you may hear from certain envious, disgruntled members of this board.

http://www.perkel.com/politics/clinton/accomp.htm​

http://clinton5.nara.gov/WH/Accomplishments/additional.html

Still waiting for you to say what he did to "handle" the economy. Are you ready to admit that you, and the other clintonites simply aren't going to be able to answer the question.

 

[palerider]

Bah. I don't really get the big deal about Bill Clinton. He was a fair president and while I don't think he was the best, he certainly wasn't the worst.

To me, always looking back on what he did or did not do, seems counter-productive. Sort of a should-have, could-have, would-have scenario. I would much rather look forward and try and figure what the hell we as a nation are going to do in order to get our country back on track... but that's me.

It is, unfortunately, necessary to look back and make sure that history isn't rewritten too severly. Today, there are people who make claims that clinton's years in office are a rational justification for more years of clinton in office. Claims have been made about clinton's accomplishments as a basis for voting democrat in the upcoming election.

I have asked repeatedly for someone to tell me what clinton did to create the economy as it existed during his years. So far, no one has stepped up to answer the question. The best explanation so far is that the economy was good because clinton's 93 budget failed to achieve its stated goals. That hardly amounts to an accomplishment, however, and certainly doesn't justify putting another clinton in the white house. If you don't look back, then you are stuck with whatever historical revisions are handed to you.