Bush vs. Clinton: The Economic Verdict

I'm glad some people are talkin some sense down there. (Thanks Pat!!)

Anonymous 7:58PM January 17, 2009

Perhaps David P of WA was not even born when Clinton came into office. Otherwise, he may have recalled, that between Regan and Clinton was the first Bush. Furthermore, he may have recalled that a recession started at the end of the Regan era, throughout the entire Bush I Administration and into the first Clinton Administration. Regan left NOTHING but problems for this country and why so many people talk about that old gas-bag like he was some sort of "fiscal saint" or "genius" in the mode of FDR simply amazes me. Regan was an idiot, his cuts in Federal funding to areas like mental health and addiction services, schools, and basic protective services (such as police) are still haveing lasting effects today. He left our State governments with so many problems taking care of mental patients on the streets, increased crime rates, and obesity at schools (because Regan, in his infinite wisdom, did things like declare Ketchup as good as a vegetable), that we are still reeling from it. And I say "we" because I have worked for a State Human Services agency since Bush I and have seen the effects first hand. There is no comparison between Dubya and Clinton....Clinton had a brain he knew how to use, we had a surplus, crime was down, and life was good. Under Dubya, life has been horrific, so why this argument is even being had, is quite amazing to me.

Patrick S of OR 4:17PM September 24, 2008