...it's not dark yet, but it's gettin' there...

November 17, 2004

Clinton's History

Larry King and historian Michael Beschloss were talking tonight, on the occasion of the opening of Clinton's library. As usual, King asked one of his famous leading questions. Something like: "It's too early to judge Clinton's presidency, don't you think?" Beschloss agreed, noting that Truman had something like a 12% approval rating at the end of his presidency, and now he's considered one of our great presidents. Beschloss also compared the Clinton legacy to Eisenhower's.

Is it too early to judge Clinton's presidency? Well, i didn't quite get a Ph.D. in history, but i'm ready to call it right now.

Clinton should be rated somewhat higher than Jimmy Carter, probably nearer to the only other president to be impeached, Andrew Johnson. Dangerously ineffective and misguided in foreign affairs, we will be dealing with the mess Clinton left us for decades.

And my opinion of Bill Clinton has improved since he left office. Nice guy, nice library, bad president.

Posted by annika, Nov. 17, 2004 |
Rubric: History


Nice guy? That's what they say about ALL the sociopaths.

Posted by: Casca on Nov. 17, 2004

We're in such a "lefty philosophy vs. conservative philosophy" battle royal right now, no lefty historian will dare criticize Clinton. As we get further from his presidency, this man will look worse and worse and worse and WORSE.

If its found out that Islamofascists were behind OKC, or Flight 800, and Clinton covered this up for political reasons, he will rightfully be scorned by history. If China uses its Lorel rocket technology in a bullying attack, Clinton will rightfully be scorned by history.

If none of that happens, Clinton will still be remembered for his irrelevance, and for the scandal sideshows.

Posted by: gcotharn on Nov. 17, 2004

Another thing: "Bridge to the 21st Century."

Mindless bullshit. Meaningless. Repeated ad infinitum. Onanism done right-- the one thing Bill Clinton was truly good at. His was "The Masturbatory Presidency"-- on so many levels.

Now, like a fabulous cosmic joke, like a bit of self-parody, the Clinton Library is a self-professed archetectural representation of a "Bridge to the 21st Century," AND an unprofessed representation of a phallus-- going so far as to faintly evoke a bend near the middle. Priceless. Is it any wonder this design was chosen, intentionally or not, by President Clinton?

I would love to see a giant sculpted hand wrapped around the base of that phallus, with maybe a cigar sculpture arrayed on a surrounding lawn.

Posted by: gcotharn on Nov. 18, 2004

Clinton's library looks like a giant trailer on blocks. Earlier this week, the Little Rock paper ran an editorial cartoon depicting just that.

One of the local radio talks shows (a liberal FOB) asked callers what kind of artwork they thought should be there. One caller suggested a statue out front that looked like a pile of old tires since that fit in with the theme of the library.

Clinton's legacy wil always be clouded by the false prosperity of his presidency. The dot-com bubble juiced the economy and led people to believe that they were well-off. I personally believe the economy alone is what allowed him to skate on the whole Monica issue. Has the economy been in trouble, he would have been run out of town on a rail.

Posted by: Steve L. on Nov. 18, 2004

At least, the Dems won't have Kerry in the White House inheriting and taking credit for another economic recovery from another Bush. The GOP will get the credit for the economy this time. I just hope that it maintains a positive trend despite lousy oil prices.

Posted by: reagan80 on Nov. 18, 2004

"Nice guy, nice library..."

I can't even give him those two things. I can only say that he looked like a nice guy -- he had a cheerful-looking countenance. His "trailer on blocks" lie-bury does seem to be a fitting reminder of his "legacy."

Posted by: 2flower on Nov. 18, 2004

As a Republican, I don't know that I'd put Clinton in the same category of ineffectiveness as Andrew Johnson. Then again, maybe future generations will categorize Clinton in the same breath as Calvin Coolidge.

Posted by: Ontario Emperor on Nov. 18, 2004

Nice guy? The guy's a fucking rapist. Ask Juanita Broderick.

Posted by: Roach on Nov. 18, 2004

“Clinton should be rated somewhat higher than Jimmy Carter” ?

No. ALL presidents should be rated higher than Carter, as he was the biggest pacifist pussy of all time, and without doubt, the worst president we’ve ever had. A gold fish could have done a better job.

At least Clinton had the balls to bomb Serbia. (and without UN approval!). Who cares that he bombed the wrong side? At least he bombed something! Who cares that the Albanian Muslims were the murdering terrorists? Clinton proved that the Libs, are not pacifists after all, and, aided by the lies of the MSM, will back aggression, so long as their boy’s aggression.

I don’t know who’s worse. The guy who bombs nothing at all, or the guy who bombs the wrong side. In any case, they rank 1 & 2 at the bottom of the all time Presidential pile.

Posted by: Mark Rezyka on Nov. 20, 2004

Mark, i'm not yet willing to put Carter at the bottom of the presidential pile. But it's only because i don't know enough about guys like John Tyler, Millard Fillmore, William Henry Harrison or Warren G. Harding. But i suspect that if i actually did the research on those guys i'd probably rate them above Carter too. i'll tell you this. Carter is the worst president i know anything about. i used to subscribe to the old cliché "he's a better ex-president than he was a president." But i changed my mind about that too, listening to the crazy shit he's been saying recently. He's a lot more whacked out than i realized. Like Michael Moore whacked out.

Posted by: annika! on Nov. 20, 2004

Which Harrison was it that caught pnuemonia on his inauguration and died? He might have been more ineffective than Carter.

OTOH, Clinton wasn't ineffective. Unfortunately.

Posted by: markm on Nov. 21, 2004

MarkM: that was William Henry Harrison, president for less than a month in 1841.

Posted by: Dave J on Nov. 24, 2004