Unfortunately neither have any impeachable crimes. And as much as I hate political debate Obama is worse. The drone thing was all in Obama's presidency. The spying thing I'm leaving alone because history is full of martial law type backlash after events like 9/11.
I don't agree with a lot of things G. R. Bush did, (father is G. H. W. Bush) but at least he did his job, something the current president cannot say. There was a full fleshed out budget each and every year, there was no government shutdown. And he actually had a coalition government where he negotiated with the other party. The thing with Katrina was not his fault, there is a lot of bureaucracy that need to be waded through before anything moves in the government. Heck at least during his term the victims were getting help. Now they are not and it pretty much brushed under the rug because the media cannot play the race card.
As for the debt thing it was bad in the 80's, during Clinton's term they cooked the books to make it look like the deficient wasn't there. They where taking money for Social Security and using it else where. The same book keeping was used by IBM, Enron and MCI Worldcom among others during this period.
As for Clinton he deserved to be impeached, he actual had a pretty bad crime. He was impeach for breach of security among other things, something that if he wasn't president carries some nasty consequences. (And if he was convicted of them now he would be considered a terrorist under current laws.) Another thing he wasn't impeach by the Republicans he was impeached by the Democratically lead Senate who in the impeachment process acts as the judge and jury. (He republican lead House acted as the prosecutor.) If I remember correctly 9 charges were brought up against him and only two where thrown out (Whitewater, Monica more than likely) They decided not to remove him because of how close the next election was but the rest of the term he was a "lame duck".
And one other thing the 2007 Security problem that pushed the economy back into the toliet could have probally been avoided if Clinton didn't strip the SEC of most of it's budget, they are suppose to watch for things like over loading profoils with too many high risk ventures and passing them off as safe.
On a side note as for the war back in 2001/2002 when it was start the US public was behind the war. I didn't care either way but I did say to some of my employees at the time who were caught up in the blood thirst, that they would end up regreting the US removing a ruler. All cases they told me no they wouldn't but six months later were wondering why we were still there, and I pointed out the article in the Geneva Convention, that state that any country that removes the government of another country has to stay until the country is Stable.
... I guess you can say that the US may be guilty of breaking the terms laid out in the Genva Convention.
