I'm pretty cynical about either party taking credit or giving blame for economic success and failure. IMHO when it comes to our current situation, we made too many promises to the boomers, we shouldn't have so fully repealed Glass Steagall, and "starving the beast" has failed as a means to shrink the size of government. Both parties are in bed with interests to their detriment. But that's how they retain power, by promising it away. By power going back and forth, we get a bit less than totally screwed as the parties make and unmake each others' plans, all the while adding complexity, which does bring some stability. If either party had a majority for 20 years, we'd probably end up in a very bad place. When it comes to Clinton, he was an effective President, and a very smart guy. Bush senior was too, but he lacked the charisma. IMO we need more presidents like them.
It's too bad Newt and the gang pulled the Lewinsky thing out of the Whitewater investigation. Aside from the hypocrisy of what Newt was doing at the time, they might have gotten another welfare reform type of legislation during that presidency. IMO the country got nothing good from that debacle, and we still suffer from a partisan mistrust that came from it.
I don't know what Newt's hypocrisy has to do with the budget, but he was forced to RESIGN from pressure from his REPUBLICAN colleagues as well as the Dems. The bottom line: Clinton was disbarred in Arkansas for LYING about his affair when investigated and was IMPEACHED in the House - period - those are facts not hyperbole. Newt needed to go and get his "wild-penis" under control - which I hope he has - finally!
What I mean by Newt's hipocrisy, is that he was using Clinton's affair to take him down while he was cheating on his wife who was battling cancer. If Clinton was a Republican president, the GOP would have never been so interested in getting the guy to perjure himself. It was the worst kind of politics. I'd be disgusted if the Dems tried it on a Republican. It weakens the nation.
I seem to recall Clinton giving credit to the republican legislature during his speech, essentially saying that back then they were willing to get things done and weren't the Mitch McConnell party of "no". I listened to Clintons speech and I have to say that it may have been one of the best delivered speeches I've ever seen anybody (politician or otherwise) give. Clinton's powers stem beyond being an ex-president, though that helps too. He has a rare, natural gift to communicate. He's a master and any politician would do well to study him. His policies or perceived inaccuracies aside, he's damn fun to watch. Like watching Michael Jordan or Tiger Woods in their prime. One of a kind.
The credit he DIDN'T attribute to them was actually formulating the budget. Brother Bill made it sound like it was all him - Bunk! Bunk I say! Brother Bill, did sign the budget, TO HIS CREDIT, into law (a raving rebuke of the current Senate which has failed to produce one of their own - which is unconstitutional and they completely rejected, on a bi-partisan basis Barak Obama's proposed budget – HISTORICAL FACT!) - However, to say "I left with a budget surplus, like he came up with it" is deceptive (a three quarter truth). By the way, I don't give any credit to the post 9-11 Republican Congresses for helping squander the surplus (they became like the past politicians and got FAT and ambivalent about the fiscal sanity produced in earlier years) a albeit after 9-11. I also did not agree with G. W. Bush’s expansion of federal power (even in the name of “compassionate capitalism”). We all seem to be "Monday morning quarterbacks" about 9-11. We don't know how a Democratic President would have responded, but surely it was a most trying situation for ANY AMERICAN to face (the worst loss of life in that type of attack in American history and the first on our shores). I guess, unlike many who read this, I will read his book to understand his, GW's, response. It is easy to sit back and criticize someone else, but what would any of US have done? So, while he gave some credit to the Republican congress, he minimized it to say the least.while he gave some credit to the Republican congress, he minimized it to say the least.
Brother Bill does what EVERY politician does which is to take complete credit for the good things they were involved with. Hypocrtich... I mean, Gingrich takes full credit for it too. No doubt it was shaped by both the executive and the legislative forcing compromises. Which can be the best governance there is unless one of the two branches is completely unwilling to work with the other.
That's exactly WHY the American people don't need to remain, for a large part, in ignorance and DEMAND that "politicians" change and become representatives with integrity and truth. It is our responsibility to enforce that as VOTERS and take active parts in writing and corresponding with our representatives in local, state and federal arenas.
I would be surprised if he's ever delivered a better speech. I think circumstances have placed him in a very favorable light, which may mean he is in his "prime".
I could not be in more wholehearted agreement on promises made to not only Boomers (and I are one - and willing to make sacrifices but not until our federal government gets their economic head on straight) , but the Gen X folks and subsequent generations as well. You cannot give everything to everybody for sure. We need to keep the "safety nets" (not I'd like to haves) and then folks need to get back to common sense (something lacking in today's mentality) solutions like, "I need to work to get it myself". Sometimes, there are job losses (had a couple myself and they are a challenge - but nobody "owes it to me"), but hopefully economic "sanity" takes over and we get more jobs created.