BILL CLINTON!!!

[AtomicKitten]

[Double T]

1. NAFTA..........

damn that still hurts....a lot!!

[bunnies]

36. NAFTA AND The intentional killing of civilians in Sudan.

does nobody remember the Al-Shifa pharmaceutical factory? :shrug:

[StudentsMustUniteNow]

2. NAFTA (I consider him a scumbag)

Welfare reform
+
comm. deregulation
=
Scum

[xultar]

6. OK if a Dem is scum in your book then what is a republic?

With friends like this who needs enemies?

[StudentsMustUniteNow]

7. That's such a shameful question, truly shameful

Think about what you just said please.

[Name removed]

13. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[William769]

15. I think you should think about what you said.

It's a two way street.

[IndyOp]

21. Xultar - We need to examine behavior of Dems & Reps with a critical eye

if we are going to end our nation's addiction to war and global domination for $$.

Clinton did good internationally and he caused great pain - he could have put an end to the killing economic sanctions that were the primary cause of death of 600,000 Iraqis between 1990 and 2003.

UN (US/UK) SANCTIONS: Primary cause of 600,000 deaths

[xultar]

22. I didn't say we didn't. But if we call our own scum...what do we call the other guys?

Bill Clinton didn't start a war that killed millions.

IF he's a scum what is Bush?

[StudentsMustUniteNow]

30. Also scum n/t

[xultar]

31. With "friends" like this who needs enemies?

[StudentsMustUniteNow]

32. With friends like Bill "NAFTA" Clinton?

Would you like me to explain to you what NAFTA is? Or do you simply look at politics like a football match (e.g. it doesn't matter what happens as long as the guy wearing our banner wins)?

[xultar]

35. Bill passes nafta and you call him scum. Boosh kills over 100k Iraqis and you

call him scum.

Hummm Maybe you should post on GreenUnderground or better yet Freepers call us scum too why not post over there.

[StudentsMustUniteNow]

37. Lyndon LaRouche is a Democrat too, and he's also scum

Having a "D" next to one's name doesn't make one immune from the judgment of the citizenry.

[NoPasaran]

54. LaRouche is neither

He's just a crackpot.

[IndyOp]

45. The labels are meaningless - they can never express the complexities of

reality. George Bush is not all evil and Bill Clinton is not all good. They have both caused (through action or inaction) deaths of 100,000's of Iraqis. To debate whether they deserve the label "scum" is to reduce the horror of the reality to name-calling -- and, yes, I do understand that someone else on this thread began this...

[Skip Intro]

3. He and Hillary withstood a lot visciousness

That's one reason why I admire them both. They never broke.

[w4rma]

11. They broke the Democratic Party, instead. If Hillary is the nominee expect a repeat of 1994. (nt)

[MaryBear]

17. More likely the Republicans made every effort to break them and the party.

And did not succeed.

[jefferson_dem]

4. Good president then. Time to move on now.

:bounce:

[IndianaGreen]

9. People voted for Bush 43 thinking that they were getting a younger Bush 41

People want to vote for Clinton 44 thinking they will get a female version of Clinton 42.

They are both WRONG!

Time to break the Bush-Clinton-Bush-Clinton addiction.

[William769]

16. And where did you purchase your crystal ball?

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

5. Pluses-

balanced budget
capturing and convicting the WTC bombers
not getting us too far involved in foreign wars

Minuses--
NAFTA--a very big minus

[Totally Committed]

8. He's not any of those things.

I think history will remember him quite differently than those who lived through his presidency. NAFTA, The Welfare Reform Act, and more will make history question his policies, and his dalliance that led to two crushing years of impeachment hearings will make history question his responsibility, and it will say that his recklessness in that area opened the door for the 8 crushing, grinding, wearing, and horrifying years of BushCo. That will be his legacy as things stand now, and that doesn't make him scum, it just makes him a hell of a lot less than we thought he was when we voted for him.

TC

[IndianaGreen]

10. A flawed man that could have been a great President, but let his passions get a better hold on him

Big Dog is like a gifted student that wastes his talents on wine, women, and song.

It was Clinton's personal behaviour that created Clinton fatigue, which led to Bush 43.

[Totally Committed]

12. I agree.

He could have been a contender. But, instead, he was a disappointment. A big one.

TC

[William769]

18. Clinton left the White House with one of the highest approval ratings ever

"Clinton fatigue", I think not. Out of 43 Presidents only 2 compared to his approval rating.

[Saturday]

14. The rest of the world loved him when he was President...

and the rest of the world loves him now. I'll go along with the rest of the world.

[William769]

19. Never thought about it that way.

Thanks!

[IndyOp]

20. So the parents of the 100,000's of Iraqi children who died during his Presidency love him?

During Bill Clinton's presidency the U.N. economic sanctions were held in place by U.S. when the other nations on the security council realized that the sanctions will killing the poor, the sick, the children, and the elderly -- and not doing a damn thing to oust Hussein. Clinton should be tried for crimes against humanity along with everyone else in the administration and the U.N. who knew and did nothing -- like Madeline Albright & John Negroponte.

It is miserably hard facing the pain this nation has caused vulnerable people around the world, but we must have the courage to see the horror wrought not just by Repblicans, but by Dems too.

UN (US/UK) SANCTIONS: Primary cause of 600,000 deaths
August 1990 - March 2003

The United Nations Security Council has maintained comprehensive economic sanctions on Iraq since August 6, 1990. The international community increasingly views the sanctions as illegitimate and punitive, because of well-documented humanitarian suffering in Iraq and widespread doubts about the sanctions’ effectiveness and their legal basis under international humanitarian and human rights law. (2)

It is now clear that comprehensive economic sanctions in Iraq have hurt large numbers of innocent civilians not only by limiting the availability of food and medicines, but also by disrupting the whole economy, impoverishing Iraqi citizens and depriving them of essential income, and reducing the national capacity of water treatment, electrical systems and other infrastructure critical for health and life. People in Iraq have died in large numbers. The extent of death, suffering and hardship may have been greater than during the armed hostilities, especially for civilians, as we shall see in more detail below. Comprehensive sanctions in Iraq, then, are not benign, non-violent or ethical. (2)

A UN "Oil-for-Food Programme," started in late 1997, offered some relief to Iraqis, but the humanitarian crisis continued. (1)

Over a period of about five years, serving an Iraqi population of 23 million, the program has delivered roughly $200 worth of goods per capita per year, including oil spare parts and other goods not directly consumed by the population. Allowing for domestic production outside the Oil-for-Food program and for smuggling, the result still appears to leave Iraqi citizens an exceedingly low per capita income which may be at or below the $1 per day World Bank threshold of absolute poverty. (2)

The measurement of deaths rests on the concept of “excess” mortality – those deaths that exceed the mortality rate in the previous, pre-sanctions period or that exceed a projection of the earlier trend towards further gains. (2)

All of these excess deaths should not be ascribed to sanctions. Some may be due to a variety of other causes. But all major studies make it clear that sanctions have been the primary cause, because of the sanctions’ impact on food, medical care, water, and other health-related factors. (2)

Prof. Richard Garfield of Columbia University carried out a separate and well-regarded study of excess mortality in Iraq. Garfield considered the same age group and the same time period as the UNICEF study. He minimized reliance on official Iraqi statistics by using many different statistical sources, including independent surveys in Iraq and inferences from comparative public health data from other countries. Garfield concluded that there had been a minimum of 100,000 excess deaths and that the more likely number was 227,000. He compared this estimate to a maximum estimate of 66,663 civilian and military deaths during the Gulf War. Garfield now thinks the most probable number of deaths of under-five children from August 1991 to June 2002 would be about 400,000. (2)

There are no reliable estimates of the total number of excess deaths in Iraq beyond the under-five population. Even with conservative assumptions, though, the total of all excess deaths must be far above 400,000. (2)

In the face of such powerful evidence, the US and UK governments have sometimes practiced bold denial. Brian Wilson, Minister of State at the UK Foreign Office told a BBC interviewer on February 26, 2001 “There is no evidence that sanctions are hurting the Iraqi people.” When denial has proved impossible, officials have occasionally fallen back on astonishingly callous affirmations. In a famous interview with Madeleine Albright, then US representative at the United Nations, Leslie Stahl of the television show 60 Minutes said: “We have heard that half a million children have died . . . is the price worth it? Albright replied, “I think this is a very hard choice, but the price – we think the price is worth it.” (2)

(1) Sanctions Against Iraq
http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/sanction/indexone.htm

(2) Iraq Sanctions: Humanitarian Implications and Options for the Future
http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/sanction/iraq1/2002/paper.htm

Real Shock & Awe: 1,405,000 Iraqis dead, 15 years sanctions & occupation
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x2375595

Bill Clinton millions of people around the world hate him.

[William769]

23. "Bill Clinton millions of people around the world hate him"

And your proof of this?

[xultar]

27. They don't need no stinking proof. IF they say it it is so. Bill killed 100k Iraqi kids?

I thought BOOSH did that.

[IndyOp]

44. If Bill Clinton's failure to life U.N. Sanctions had been a primary cause of the death

of my family member, I would feel something a whole lot like hate. 600,000 Iraqis dead because U.S. would not allow killing economic sanctions to be lifted -- multiply that by the number of people related to those 600,000 people and add those who witnessed the completely unnecessary deaths and I am confident it would be millions.

Really...what would you feel if you knew the "most powerful man in the world" could have stopped the death of your loved one and did not?

Madelyn Albright's statement to Leslie Stahl when asked about the 100,000's of dead children echoes in my mind, "Well, Leslie, we know that the deaths are a terrible price to pay, but we think the price is worth it."

Think about it objectively. Any one person who had the power to stop that and did not is hated and millions of people were impacted.

[Hippo_Tron]

47. Wouldn't those people not have died if Saddam had fed his own people?

[IndyOp]

53. The oil for food program -- according to all objective observors --

was conducted in as efficient and as effective a manner as possible. Corruption meant that Iraq did not get all of the money it should have and the U.S. kept a lot of Iraq's money tied up that it was supposed to give to Iraq to buy food. The amount of money available for food was way below that necessary to provide everyone the most basic of diets.

Saddam is responsible for a lot of bad -- the effect of U.N. sanctions on Iraq was not his fault.

[TeamJordan23]

24. If it wasn't for the whole Lewinsky thing, I think Gore would be president right now

But overall, Clinton had a very good presidency.

[xultar]

25. If Gore didn't shun Clinton he'd be president right now. Gore EFFED up

[William769]

33. Ain't that the truth!

President Clinton left office with an approval rating that only rivals two other Presidents!

[TeamJordan23]

41. Totally Agree, but he shunned him primarly because of the Lewinsky scandel. nt

[endgame1]

26. Was the Clinton Balanced Budget Real ...

Did Bill Clinton ever really balance the budget?
I was watching the debates the other week and was wondering what Gravel was getting at when he was talking about Clinton changing some bookkeeping practice and basically staging a "balanced " budget by taking social security receipts off of being accounted for as debt and moving it onto some newly created category.
The research I did seems to back that up and if so; if Clinton's balanced budget was truly faked for our benefit, then this means that the NAFTA sellout wasn't his worse act as president, his entire presidency was as fake as Bush's. LOSER!

[William769]

34. Oy vey!

:eyes:

[StudentsMustUniteNow]

38. Keep rolling your eyes

I'm getting sick of the New Democrats.

[William769]

40. I'm getting sick of people claiming to be Democrats. NT

[StudentsMustUniteNow]

42. Want to check my registration card? n.t

[CRH]

55. You mean like republican lite DLCers, n/t

[William769]

56. Heres a little tip for you.

Repukes use term liberal to mean dirty as you use the term DLC, both are wrong, I am proud to say I am both.

[Phredicles]

28. Insufficient choices: "Disappointment" falls between "okie-dokiee" and "scum"

[election_2004]

29. I voted "MEH"....

He wasn't a disaster, and wasn't the "Liberal Communist" that the RW made him out to be.

But his embrace of bad policies was frequently disappointing and off-putting. NAFTA, DOMA, Welfare Reform, not to mention his vague "Family Values" references (as though "family values" is some specific policy plank).

[stevedeshazer]

39. Scumbag

Sold us out with NAFTA, CAFTA, GATT, DOMA.

Sorry to disappoint all you DLC'ers.

He's a great talker. That and three bucks will get ya a gallon of gas or a cuppa joe.

The Clinton thing is way over.

Time to move ahead.

[StudentsMustUniteNow]

43. That's what I'm talking about NT

[mitchum]

46. A whore

[Hippo_Tron]

48. Clinton had to deal with an electore that bought into Reagan's bullshit

We're still dealing with that electorate today. The Democrats shifting to the right on economic issues isn't entirely about getting big corporate donations. It is also because Ronnie Raygun convinced Reagan's a large chunk of the middle class into believing that poor lazy people were the cause of all of their problems.

What many people don't realize is that Americans still buy into this bullshit and if the Democrats were to go back to its pre-Reagan stances on economic issues, the middle class would probably once again abandon us in favor of a Republican who will blame it on poor lazy people.

Like it or not, the policies of Bill Clinton's administration reflected the views of the vast majority of Americans. If it's any consolation, The Robert Taft wing of the Republican Party spent almost 50 years trying to overturn the New Deal and couldn't even take a bite out of it until Reagan was elected. They had to complain about how Nelson Rockefeller's wing of the party was too liberal just like we complain that the DLC is too conservative.

[illinoisprogressive]

49. NAFTA and DLC - nuff said

[Totally Committed]

52. How about that Welfare Reform Act?

What an abomination.

TC

[GeorgeGist]

50. Yoostabee ...

fooled by him.

[marmar]

51. I'd still take him in a heartbeat over the troglodyte at 1600 Pennsylvania now....

but I must say, I hold Clinton in lower regard post-presidency, the complete opposite of the way I feel about Jimmy Carter. The Clinton years were good for me and a lot of other people economically, but now we're seeing the very negative impacts of policies such as NAFTA.