| Domo-Kun said: Clinton created a SURPLUS of funds for the US. This alone is impressive. Who gives a shit if he got a BJ? Most guys like BJ's, the president shouldn't be an exception. |
Clinton had absolutely nothing to do with the surplus. Nothing. What caused the surplus can be summed up in two words: microcomputer revolution. If anything, you could say Clinton caused part of the current debt mess by failing to anticipate the dotcom bust (which bush had to deal with in the early part of his term). And ftr I'm not saying that was his (clinton's) fault, I'm just saying that his actions as president in no way caused the '90's economic boom, which is the real reason the US government had a surplus.
OT: worse than Harding, Buchanan, Johnson...? no. Was he a good president? hell no, but he's not even close to the worst. and neither is Bush btw.
I would like to point out though that you really have to wait at least 35-40 years before you can get a truly accurate picture of how good or bad a president's actions were. For example, look at how people view Nixon today vs. when he left office. Nobody thinks he was a great president (though I have read some historians praise his foreign policy decisions), but nobody is like ZOMG!!! WORST PRESIDENT EVAHH!!!11 like they were in the late '70's.
Not trying to be a fanboy. Of course, it's hard when you own the best console eve... dang it
